AN
INTRODUCTION
TO THE
Critical t>tuDp an& l¬olefcge
OP THE
HOLY SCRIPTURES.
BY
THOMAS HARTWELL HORNE, M.A.
SIXTH EDITION, COERECTBD AND EN&AKGED.
ILLUSTRATED WITH NyMEUOUS MAPS AND FAC-SIBllLES OP
JHHLICAL MANUSCRIPTS.
II.,
LONDON:
PRINTED FOE T. CADELL, STEAND;
W. BLACKWOOD, E0INBUEGH ; ' AND R, MILLIKEN, PUBUN,
MDCCCXXVHL
LONDON :
Printed by A. & R. Spottiswoode,
New-Street- Square.
A C SIMILE 0* THE BIBLIA PAUPERUM.
Supposed to have been executed between A. D, 1420 and 1435,
p1pi altoifltjoffi reft fume
80 tot* totaj)ixicf/e afcatnca
ft itmculftnc e mtt
sl2Bs
u>
: I"W Ml v V "f
CONTENTS
THE SECOND VOLUME.
PART L
ON SCRIPTURE-CRITICISM.
Page
CHAPTER I. On the Original Languages of Scripture.
SECTION I. On the Hebreiv Language.
Introductory Remarks on the Oriental or Shemitish Languages - - 2
I. Origin of the Hebrew Language - 3
II. Historical Sketch of the Hebrew Language - 5
III. Antiquity of the Hebrew Characters - - _ ,. g
IV. Antiquity of the Hebrew Vowel -Points . - - _ 8 12
SECTION II. On the Greek Language,
I. Similarity of the Greek Language of the New Testament with that of
tlie Alexandrian or Septuagint Greek Version - - 13
II. The New Testament, why written in Greek - - 13 ]8
III. Examination of the Style of the New Testament - - 18 22
IV. Its Dialects - - - .. _ _ gg
Hebraisms - 23 27
llabbinisms ----._ 07
Aramteisms, or Syriasms and Chaldaism.s - 27
Latinisms - - . _ gg
Persisms and Cilicisms - - 29
SECTION III. Of the Cognate or Kindred Languages,
I. Aramasan with its two Dialects ; 1. The Chaldee ; 2. The Syriac - 30
II. The Arabic, with its Derivative, the Ethiopie - - _ gj
III. Use and Importance of the Cognate Languages to Sacred Criticism - sj
CHAPTER II. On the Antient Versions of the Scriptures.
SECTION I. On the Targums or Chaldee Paraphrases of the
Old Testament.
I. Targum of Onicelos - _ _ . - 34
II. Targum of" the Pseudo-Jonathan - - _ 35
III. The Jerusalem Targum . _ _ _ i\>i<\.
IV. The Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel - ... 35
V. The Targum on the Hagiographa - - - . 37
VI. The Targum on the Megilloth - - _ . jbfd,
VII. VIII. IX. Three Targums on the Book of Esther - - ,,ibld.
X. A Targum on the Books of Chronicles - .ibid.
XI. Real Value of the different Targums - ~ - ibid
A 2
IV
CONTENTS.
SECTION II. On the Antient Greek Versions of the Old Testament. Page
I The Septuagint -
1. History of it - - - -
2. A Critical Account of its Execution -
3. "What Manuscripts were used by its Authois
4. Account of the Biblical Labours of Ongeii
5 Notice of the Recensions or Editions of Eusebius and Pam-
philus, of Lucian and Hesychius - - -
G Importance of the Septuagint Veision in the Ciiticism and In-
terpretation of the New Testament
II Account of other Greek Versions of the Old Testament
1 . Version of Aquila -
2. Version of Theodotion -
3. Version of Symmachus -
4. 5, 6. Anonymous Veisionq -
III. References in Antient Manuscripts ta other Veisions
SECTION III. On the Antient Oriental Versions of the Old and
New Testaments.
I. SyrinL Versions - - ...
1 Peschito, or Literal Version - -
2 Philoxeman Version -
3 Syro-Estrangelo and Palfssti.no- Syriac Version
II. Egyptian Versions -
Coptic and Sahidic Versions - - -
Ammonia.il and Basinuuc Versions ...
III. Ethiopic Version -
IV. Arabic Versions ......
V. Armenian Version -
VI. Persian Versions -
SECTION IV, On the Anlient Western Versions of the Scriptures.
I Antient Latin Versions of the Scriptuies - - -
1. Old Italic or Ante-Hieronymian Veision
2. Bibhcdl Labours and Latin Version of Jeiorae
3. Vulgate Version and its Revisions -
4. Critical Value of the Latin Vulgate Version
The Gothic. Veision -
The Sclavonic Veision - -
II
III.
IV. Anglo-Saxon Version
CHAPTER III. On the Manuscripts of t?ie Bible.
SECTION I. On the Hebrew Manuscripts of the Old Testament.
I. Different Classes of Hebrew Manuscripts .
II. The Rolled Manuscripts of the Synagogue -
III. The Square Manuscripts used by the Jews m private Life
IV. Antient Recensions or Editions of Hebiew Manuscripts
V. Age of Hebrew Manuscripts -
VI. Ot the Order in which the Sacred Books are arranged in Manuscupts
VII. Modern Families or Recensions of Hehiew Manuscripts
VIII. Notice of the most Antient Manuscripts
IX. Brief Notice of the Manuscupts of die Indkn Jews
SECTION II On the Manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch.
I Origin of the Samaritans - ...
II. Account of the Samaritan Pentateuch. Manuscripts of it -
III Variations of the Samaritan Pentateuch from the Hebrew
IV. Versions of the Samaritan Pentateuch -
SECTION III. On the Manuscripts of the Greek Scriptures.
1. General Observations on Greek Manuscripts.
I, On what Materials written -
II, Form of Letters - .
39
39 42
42 44
44 4G
4750
50,51
51
52
52
52
5.T
54
54,55
56
SB 50
59,60
60, Gl
31
62
63
6466
67,68
68
69
69
69
70
7174
74,75
75
76
77,78
80
ibid.
81
82
83
84
85,86
86 89
8991
93
94
95
96, 97
97
98
CONTENTS.
Pa
III. Abbreviations - - - 98, '
IV. Codices Palimpsest! or Rescripti - - - - 1(
V. Account of the different Families, Recensions, 01 Editions of Manu-
scripts of the New Testament - - - 100 1]
1. The System of Dr Gnesbach and Michaelis - - 101 1(
2. The System of M. Mnttbaa - - - - 1C
3. The System of Mi. Nolan - - 104 1J
4 The System of Prof, Hug - - - - 11
5. The System of Piof. Scholz - - - 111 11
VI. On the Focdus cum GIECCIS, or Coincidence between many Gicek Ma-
nuscnpts and the Vulgate Latin Version - - - 11
2. Account of Greek Manuscnpts containing the Old and Netu
Testaments.
I The Alcxandi ian Manuscupt - - 116 12
II. The Vatican Manuscript - - ... 122 12
3. Account of Manuscripts (entire or in part] containhigme
Scptuagint 01 Greek Version of the Old Testament.
I. Tho Codex Cottomanus - - - - -125 12!
II. III. The Codices, Sairavianus and Colbcrtinus - 12
IV. The Codex Cassaieiib - - - - 12
V The Codex Ambrosianus - - - - 12
VI. The Codex Coishnianus - - - -13'
VII The Codex Basilio-Vaticauus - - - 13'
VIII The Codex Tuncensis - - - .13
4. Account of the principal Manuscnpts containing the New
Testament, entire or in part.
I. The Codex Cottoniauus (Titus C. XV ) - 13'
II. The Codex Bezoe 01 Cnntabngicnsis - 13313
III The Codex Eplnemi - - - - 13'
IV The Codex Claiomontanub - - - 13'
V. The Codex Argenteus ,. - - 138, 13'
MSS of the Gothic Version, discovered by signor Mai - 140,14
VI, The Codex Rescriptus of St. Matthew's Gospel in Trinity College,
Dublin - - - - - 14
VII The Codex Laudiamis, 3. 142, 14!
VIII. The Codex Coislmianus - - - - 14'
IX. The Codex Bocmoriatms - - - 14-
X. The Codex Cypnus - - - 14,'
XL The Codex Basibensis E. - - 14(
XII. The Codex San-Germanensis - - 14'
XIII. The Codex Augiensis - - - -141
*XIV. The Codex Harleianus, 5598 - - 14t
XV. The Codc-x Regius, 01 Stephani i\ - - - 14f
XVI. The Codex Uft'enbacluanus - - - 14
XVII. The Codices Manners- Suttoniam - - 15C
XVIII. The Codices Mo&quciises - - - 151
XIX. The Codex Biixieiisw - - - - 151
XX. Other MSS written in small characters, and deserving of especial
notice; viz.
1. The Codex Basileensis, 1 . - 152
2. The Codex Berohncnsis - - - 152
3. The Codex Coisendoncensis - - - J52
4. The Codex Montfoitmnus - - - 153
5. The Codex Meermanmaiius - - - 154
6. The Codex Regius, 50. - - - - 155
7. Tho Codex Leicofatrensis - - - 155
8. The Codex Vindobonenais - * - 156
9. The Codex Ebnerianus - - 156
10. The Codex Ottobonianus - - - - IS 1
XXI, Notices of the Collations of the Barberini and Velcsian Mmmsciipts - 1 57, 158
A 3
y j CONTENTS.
Page
CHAPTER IV. On the Divisions and Marks of Distinction,
occurring in Manuscripts and printed Editions of the Scrip-
tures.
SECTION I. On the Divisions and Marks of Distinction^ occurring
in the Old Testament.
I. Different Appellations given to the Scriptures - - - ] S9
II. General Divisions of the Canonical Books - - - 159
III Particulaily of the Old Testament - - - - ISO
1. The Law - - 162
2. The Prophets - - - - 162
3. The Cetubim or Hagiographa - - - 162
IV. Account of the Masora - - 163167
V. Modern Divisions of the Books of the Old Testament. Chapters
and Verses - ... 167, leg
SECTION II. On the Divisions and Maries of Distinction, occur-
ring in the Nelu Testament.
I. Antient Divisions of TnAoi and Ke0o\ai - - - 159
Ammonian, Eusebian, and Euthalian Sections. Modern Division of
Chapters - - - - - 1TO
II. Account of the Antient and Modern Punctuation of the New Testa-
ment - - - - 171
-Antient Sxoi and Modern Verses - - - 172, 175
III. Of the Titles to each Book - - - 173
IV. Subscriptions to the different Books - - '174
CHAPTER V. Of the Various Readings occurring in the Old
and New Testaments.
I. The Christian Faith not affected by Various Readings - 175
II. Nature of Various Readings. Difference between them and mere
Errata - - - - 177
III. Causes of Various Readings - - _ 177
1. The Negligence or Mistakes of Transcribers - -177 ISO
2. Errors or Imperfections m the Manuscript copied - isj
3. Critical Conjectuie - jg] ? j82
4. Wilful Corruptions of a Manuscript from Party Motives . 183
IV. Sources, whence a true Reading is to be determined - . 133
1. Manuscripts - * , _ jgg 335
2. Antient Editions - - -185
3. Antient Versions - _ _ igg ] 9O
4. Parallel Passages - - 190 jgg
5. Quotations in the Writings of the Fathers - - 192195
6. Critical Conjecture - - - 195, 19G
V. General Rules for judging of Various Readings - 196 gos
CHAPTER VI. On the Quotations from the Old Testament in
the New. (Quotations in the New Testament from the Apo*
cryphal Writers, andfjom Profane Authors - - 204*
SECTION I. On the External Form of the Quotations from the
Old Testament in the Netu,
I. Tables of the Quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures and from the
Septuagint Version, m the Order in which they occur in the New
Testament -
II. Classification of the Quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures in the
New Testament - 247
III. Classification of the Quotations from the Septnagint Version in the
New Testament . 2 ^ I ago
IV.- Considerations on the probable Causes of the seeming Discrepancies
in the Quotations from the Old Testamenfaui the New - - 25<J 259
CONTENTS. Vll
SECTION II. On the Internal Form of Quotations, or the Mode in
tuhich Citations from the Old Testament are applied in the
New. j)
General Observations on the Rabbinical and other Modes of quoting the
Old Testament. Classification of the Quotations in the New
Testament - - * - 260263
I. Quotations from the Old Testament in the New, in which the Predic-
tions are literally accomplished - 269
II. Quotations, in which that is said to have been done, of which the
Scriptures have not spoken in a literal, but in a spiritual, Sense - 264
III. Quotations made by the Sacred Writeis, in the Way of Illustration - 265268
IV. Quotations, and other Passages in the Old Testament, which are al-
luded to in the New - - 263
SECTION III. Of Apocryphal Passages, supposed to be quoted in
the Netu Testament. Quotations from Profane Authors - 270 272
CHAPTER VII. On Harmonies of Scripture.
I. Occasion and Design of Harmonies of Script uie . . 272
II. Harmonies of the Four Gospels - - 273
III. Observations on the different Schemes of Harmonisers, and on the
Duration of the Public Ministry of Jesus Christ - - 275 28C
PAIIT II.
ON THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.
BOOK I.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES Or INTERPRETATION.
CHAPTER I. On the Sense of Scripture.
SECTION I. On the Meaning of Words.
I Nature of Words - - - 28
II. Sense of Scripture defined - - - 28
1. The Literal Sense - - . - - 282, 28
2. The Allegorical, Typical, and Parabolic Sense 28
3. The Moral Sense of Professor Kant shown to be without
Foundation - - 2E
SECTION II. General Rules for investigating the Meaning of
Words .... . 286 2
SECTION III. Of Emphases.
I. Nature of Emphasis . its different kinds - 21
II, Verbal Emphases - - - 2!
1. Emphases of the Greek Article - - -293 2!
2. Emphases of other words - 2!
3. Emphatic Adverbs - - - - 2<
III. Real Emphases - - - 2!
IV. General Rules for the Investigation of Emphases - * 256 2(
CHAPTER, II. On the Subsidiary Means for ascertaining the
Usus Loguendi.
SECTION I. Direct Testimonies for ascertaining the Usus Loquendi.
1. THE TESTIMONY OP CONTBMPOB.AB.T WBITEBS. SODTIOHS or THIS TKS-
TBMtONY !
I. Definition of Words - - - 2
II. Examples, and the Nature of the Subject - . - 3
IT I. Comparison of Similar or Parallel Passages - - 300 fl
viii CONTENTS.
SECTION L Direct Testimonies for ascertaining the Usus Lo- Page
quendz, continued.
2. ANTIENT VERSIONS
Importance of Antient Veisions as an hermeneutical Aid - -310,311
Observations on the respective Merits of the several Antient Ver-
sions - - - - 312
Rules for consulting them to the best advantage - - 313,314
| 3. SCHOLIASTS AND GLOSSOGRAPHERS
I Nature of Scholia - - - - 314
II And of Glossal IBS - - 315
III. Rules for consulting them to advantage in the Interpretation of
the Scriptures - - - - -315, 31 G
4. ON THE TESTIMONY OF FOREIGNERS WHO HAVE ACQUIRED A LANGUAGE 316 318
SECTION II, Indirect Testimonies for ascertaining the Usus Lo-
quendi.
1. Or THE CONTEXT- - . - - 318
I. The Context defined and illustrated - - -318 320
II Rules for ascertaining the Context ... 320324
2. OP THE SUBJECT-MATTER - - - - - 325
3. OF THE SCOPE - - 326
I. The Scope defined. Importance of investigating the Scope of
a Book or Passage of Scripture - - 326
II. Rules for investigating it - - - - 327 33O
4. ANALOGY OF LANGUAGES - - 33O
I. Analogy of Languages defined. Its different Kinds - ibid.
II. Use of Grammatical Analogy - - 331
III. Analogy of Kindred Languages - - - ibid.
IV. Hints for consulting this Analogy in the Interpretation, of Scrip-
ture - 332 334
V. Foundation of Analogy in all Languages - - 334
5. OP THE ANALOGY OF FAITH - - - - 335
I. Analogy of Faith, defined and illustrated - - 335
II. Its Importance in studying the Sacred Writings - - 336
III. Rules for investigating the Analogy of Faith - - 337 340
6. ON THE ASSISTANCE TO BE DERIVED raoji JEWISH WRITINGS IN THE IN-
TERPRETATION OF THE SCRIPTURES
I. The Apocryphal Books of the Old Testament - - 341
II. The Talmud _____ 341
1. The Misna - - - ibid.
2. The Gemara or Commentary - 342
Jerusalem and Babylonish Tahuuds - - ibid.
III. The Writings of Philo and Josephus - - 344
1. Account of Philo - ibid.
2. Account of Josephus - - - 345, 346
7. OH THE ASSISTANCE TO BE DERIVED FROM THE WRITINGS OF THE GREEK
FATHERS IN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE SCRIPTURES - - 347 350
8. OH HISTORICAL CIRCUMSTANCES
I. Order of the Different Books of Scripture - - 351
II. Their Titles - - ibid.
III. Their Authors - - - - - - 352
IV. Their Dates _____ ibid.
V. The Place where written - 353
VI. Occasion on which they were written _ 354
VII. Antient Sacred and Profane History - ibid.
VIII. Chronology ... - - 356
IX. Biblical Antiquities, including
1. The Political and Ecclesiastical State of the Jews and other
Nations mentioned in the Scriptures - - - ibid.
2. Coins, Medals, and other antient Remains - - 357
Cautions in the Investigation of Biblical Antiquities - 358 -360
3. Geography - _ - - 361
4 Genealogy - - - ibid.
5. Natural History - - - - - 361, 362
6 Philosophical Sects and Learning - - 362
9. ON COMMENTARIES .
I. Different Classes of Comment&toin - 362
CONTENTS.
P.
IT. Nature of Scholia - - f
III. Of Commentators, strictly so called - ib
IV Paraphrases - 3
V. Collections of Observations on Holy Writ - 3
VI. The Utility and Advantage of Commentaries - - ib
VII. Design to be kept in View when consulting them - - fl
VIII. Rules for consulting Commentators to the best Advantage - 366 3
BOOK II.
ON THE SPECIAL INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.
CHAPTER I. On the Intel pretation of the Figurative Lan-
guage of Scripture - - - ---36
SECTION I. General Observations on the Interpretation of Tropes
and Figures ^ - - - - - - 371 3*5
SECTION II. On the Interpretation of the Metonymies occurring
in the Scriptures.
Nature of a Metonymy - 3'
I. Metonymy of the Cause - 379 31
II. Metonymy of the Effect - - - SI
III. Metonymy of the Subject - - -382 3J
IV. Metonymy of the Adjunct, in which the Adjunct is put for the
Subject - - - - 384 Si
SECTION III. On the Interpretation of Scripture Metaphors.
Natuie of a Metaphoi Souiceb of Sciiptnie Metaphois - - 3Sff, Sf
I. The Works of Natuie - - - SE
1, Antliropopathy - - - 3
2. Prosopopoeia - . - - S
II. The Occupation?, Customs, and Arts of Life . 3S
III. Sacred Topics, or Religion and Things connected with it - 33
IV. Sncred History - - 39
SECTION IV. On the Interpretation of Scripture Allegories.
The Allegoiy defined. Different Species of Allegory 39
llules for the Intel pretation ot Scripture Allegories - 393 -39
SECTION V. On the Interpretation of Scripture Parables.
I. Natuic of a Paiable ... - _ 39
1 1, Antiquity of this Mode of Insti uctiou - - - 40
III Uulcs foi the Inteipretation of Parables - - -400 40
IV. Paiables, why used by Jesus Chi ist - - 406 t 40
V. Remarks on the distinguishing Excellencies of Christ's Parables, com-
pared with the most culebiated Fables of Antiquity - - 40? 41
SECTION VI. On Scripture Provetbs.
I Nature of Proverbs. Prevalence of this Mode of Iiiiti uction - 4J 1
II. Diflerent Kinds of Proveibs - - - 41
III. The Proveibs occuuiug in the New Testament, how to be interpreted - ibid
SECTION VII. Concluding Observations on the Figurative Lan-
guage of Scripture.
I. Syncchdoche - - - - - 41,
II. Iiony - - - - 41i
III. Hyperbole - - - - - 41'
IV. Paronomasia - - - - 411
X CONTENTS.
Page
CHAPTER II, On the Interpretation of the Poetical Parts of
Scripture.
I. A large Portion of the Old Testament proved to be Poetical. Culti-
vation of Poetry by the Hebrews - - -419 421
II. The Sententious Parallelism, the Grand Characteristic of Hebrew
Poetry. Its Origin and Varieties - - -421 424
1. Parallel Lines gradational - 424426
2. Parallel Lines antithetic - - 426
3. Parallel Lines constructive ... 427 429
4. Parallel Lines introverted - - 429, 430
III. The Poetical Dialect not confined to the Old Testament. Reasons
for expecting to find it in the New Testament - -430,431
Proofs of the Existence of the Poetical Dialect there
1. From simple and direct Quotations of single Passages from
the Poetical Parts of the Old Testament - - 432
2. From Quotations of different Passages, combined into one
connected whole - ... 432, 433
3. From Quotations mingled with Original matter - - 433, 434
IV. Original Parallelisms occurring in the New Testament ,
1. Parallel Couplets - - - - - - 435
2. Parallel Triplets - - - - - - 435
3. Quatrains - ... - - 436
4, 5. Stanzas of Five and Six Lines - 436, 437
6. Stanzas of more than Six Parallel Lines - 438
V. Other Examples of the Poetical Parallelism in the New Testament
1. Parallel Lines gradational - - - -439
2. The Epanodos - - - 440
VI. Different kinds of Hebrew Poetry .
1. Prophetic Poetiy - 441, 442
2 Elegiac Poetiy - - - 443
8. Didactic Poetry . _ - - - 443
4. Lyric Poetry - - - - - 443
5. The Idyl -__-,_ 443
6 Dramatic Poetry - - - - 443
7. Acrostic or Alphabetical Poetry - 444
VII. General Observations for better understanding the Poetical Compositions
of the Sacred Poets - 445,446
CHAPTER III. On the Spiritual Interpretation of the Scriptures.
SECTION I. General Observations on the Spiritual Interpretation
of the Scriptures - - 41.6 4,49
SECTION II. Canons for the Spiritual Interpretation of Scripture.
SECTION III. On the Interpretation of Types. 449 454
I. Nature of a Type - 455
II, Different Species of Types
1. Legal Types 45C
2. Pi ophetical Types - 457
3. Historical Types - - .... 4^-7
III. Rules for the Interpretation of Types - - 453 460
IV. Remarks on the Interpretation of Symbols - 460 453
CHAPTER IV. On the Interpretation of the Scriptut e Pt ophecies.
SECTION I. General Rules for ascertaining the Sense of the
Prophetic Writings - ... 452 4^8
SECTION II. Observations on the Accomplishment of Prophecy in
general .... . 468472
SECTION III. Observations on the Accomplishment of Prophecies
concerning the Messiah in particular - - 473 475
CHAPTER V. On the Dochinal Interpretation of Scripture 475 482
CONTENTS. XI
Page
CHAPTER VI. Moral Interpretation of Scripture.
SECTION I. On the Interpretation of the Moral Parts of Scrip-
ture - . - _ 482 48
SECTION II. On the Interpretation of the Promises and Threat-
enings of Scripture - 489 492
CHAPTER VII. On the Interpretation^ and, Means of Har-
monising Passages of Scripture, 'which are alleged to be con-
tradictory.
SECTION I. Seeming Contradictions in Historical Passages.
1. Seeming Contradictions in the different Circumstances related - 49 S 502
2. Apparent Contradictions from Things being related in a duTeient Order
by the Sacred Writers - 502 504
3. Apparent Contradictions, arising from Differences in Numbers - 504506
4. Apparent Contradictions in the relation of Events in one Passage, and
References to them in another - - 507
SECTION II. Apparent Contradictions in Chronology - 507 511
SECTION III. Apparent Contradictions between Ptophecies and
their Fulfilment ----- 512514
SECTION IV. Apparent Contradictions in Doctrine.
1 . Seeming Contradictions from a Mode of speaking, which, to our Appre-
hensions, is not sufficiently clear - 514 516
2. Apparent Contradictions from the same Terms being used in different
and even Contradictory Senses - - _ - - 516,517
3, Apparent Contradictions, in Points of Doctrine, arising from, the dif-
ferent Designs of the Sacred Writeis - - - -517,518
4. Apparent Contradictions, arising fiom the different Ages in which the
Sacred Writers lived, and the different Degrees of Knowledge which they
possessed - - - - - - 518, 519
SECTION V. Seeming Contradictions to Morality - 519 534
SECTION VI. Apparent Contradictions oettueen the Sacred Writers 535 547
SECTION VII. Seeming Inconsistencies between Sacred and Profane
Writers - - - 547553
SECTION VIII. Alleged Contradictions to Philosophy and the
Nature of Things - 553 56C
CHAPTER VIII, On the Influential and Ptactlcal Reading
qfScriptuie.
SECTION I. On the Inferential Reading of the Bible.
I. General Ilnlo-j for the Deduction of Inforuncos - 561 56'
II, Observations for ascertaining tho Souices of Internal Inferences - 5G4, 5G/
III, Observations for ascertaining the Sources of External Inferences - 56$ 5(jj
SECTION II, On the Practical Reading of Scripture - 568574
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL APPENDIX, containing a Concise Account of
the Principal Editions of the Holy Scriptures, and of the Prin-
cipal Philologers, Critics, and Commentators, luho have elit'
cidated the Text, History, and Antiquities of the Bible 1 322
BIBLIOGRAPHICAL INDEX - - - 323 345
Lately published by the Author of this WotJc,
I. A COMPENDIOUS INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF THE
BIBLE being an ANALYSIS or Abridgement of the present Work. In one laigu
volume 12mo. t handsomely punted, and illustrated with Maps and other Engravings,.
Price 9*.
We bare no hesitation in affirming, that it la m leahty-what its title imports a Compendious
Introduction to the Study of the Bible It combines a multiplicity of subjects, yet methodically ai ranged ,
it is brief, yet comprehensive, touching upon most of the questmns on which the less informed tan ilcmrc
instruction and the whole is executed in a style simple, perspicuous, and unaffected. We therefore most
carnestlv recommend it to the youth of both sexes , also those who have not the time nor nitMiis lui con.
suliinir Sir Home's larger Treatise , to those who are commencing their biblical studies , to all, in short,
who wish to read the Bible with seriousness and attention, as at once the shortCbt and most complete
Manual m the English Language." CHRISTIAN REMEMBRANCER, February, 1827,
truth,
Compendiouti "introduction "IB "the" CHEAPEST work in the language on the subject of Biblical Criticism."
EVANGELICAL MAG WINE, February, 1827
" It is quite an acquisition, as an analysis of his large Work, and as bringing many of Its important points
before us It would form an admirable text-book to any theological proiessoi , and the general bdiolar
will find it to his advantage to consult it, if he has not time to go into the multifarious details ol tin-
Critical Introduction It is beautifully printed, contains a large quantity of nutter, anil the maps and
other illustrative engravings and vignettes are admirably executed " CONGIIECIAIIONAL MACIAZINL,
March, 1827 _
" To thoae who cannot afford to purchase Mr Home's larger Work, and even to those who posses it, ting
volume will be found exceedingly valuable, as an epitome of information, selected with luimgiiui labour
from a large number of resources " HOME MISSIONARY MAGAZINE, Februtay, 1827
" We can cordially recommend it as a valuable compendium of information connected with the inter-
pretation. of Scripture" WESLEYAN METHODIST MAGAZINE, March, 1827
" The contents of a library, condensed Into a single volume " GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE, April, 1SS7
" Ce livre ert 1'analyse d'un ourrage en quatre volumes du mfime auteur, intitule ' Introduction 1 1 'Etude
Critique ct 1 la Science des Saintes Ecritures ' II est ecnt avcc clarte ct precision, ct il pent cvitur dc
tongues et fastidieuses recherchea Ceux qui dcsirent connaitro la ySntfi touclmnt la Religion Heviieo
pourtont le consulter avec fruit, les preuves, dc la Religion Chrd'tienue s'y trouvent placi3en dana un inc-il-
feur ordre que dans beaucoun d'ouvrages du meme genre, et sont accompagnces do document) et rufloxiuiiti,
que 1'on ne trouve point ailleurs Ce volume x-ontient un Appcndicc ct une Table dca Matifircs qiii un
reudent la lecture plus facile " RE\UE ENCYCLOPEDKJUE, Jittn, 1837, p fi70
II. DEISM REFUTED, OR PLAIN 11EASONS FOR BEING A CHRIH-
TIAN. Seventh Edition, collected and enlarged; handsomely printed m 12mo. Piicc5.s
" We recommend the Work, as an excellent manual for youth, and as a\ cry buitnblo present to persons, who
may, under any circumstances, be placed in contact with the opposcrs ot revealed religion It u especially
deserving of notice, as refuting the very latest objections which have been devised." CinuuruN GUARDIAN,
1826. B
III. THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF THE TRINITY bnefly stated und
defended : and the Church of England vindicated from the Charge of Un chant ubkn ess in
retaining the Athanasian Creed. Second Edition, in one volume large 12mo. PJICC fis,
" Mr Home's treatise is excellently adapted for convoying information to tho youiiR, for cstHbliHluiiK
them in the first great principles of their Christian laith, and for satibiyine the laudable curuiaity ot .ill
who desire to know the scriptural grounds of their profession, and to give an atibwer mid n dofoncu to
such as ask a reason of the hope that ia in them," CHRISTIAN RuMEMiuiANCEn, or Churchlnaii'u lilbhcul,
Ecclesiastical, and Literary Miscellany, October, 1890
IV. ROMANISM CONTRADICTORY TO SCRIPTURE, or, the Peculiar
Tenets of the Chuich of Rome as exhibited in her accredited Formularies, con tins tod
vnth the Holy Scriptures. A New Edition, 12mo Puce I?.
" Mr Hartwell Home has compressed a large portion of valuable information into a very narrow com-
pass " BRITISH CRITIC and Thcol Rev July, 1827
"Mr H might, m imitation of Leslie, have called this little publication ' A Short MethoJ with tho
Catholics ' His method is, in each section, to show in Scripture language what arc the tenets uf Hmplmc,
and then contrast them with the tenets ol Popery and n thorough contrast they are His ar^umento aro
founded on facts against which there can be no appetl " HOME MISSIONARY MAGAZINE, JUnrt'A, 1S27.
%* TEN THOUSAND COPIES of this httlc Manual have been distributed in Ireland, at a very low puce, at
the expense of some gentlemen who take an interest in the moral and icligunui welfare ot Ui.it country.
London: Printed for T. Cadcll, htrnml , W. Elackivood, Edinbiugli, and 11. Milhkuu, Dublin
INTRODUCTION
TO THE
CRITICAL STUDY AND KNOWLEDGE
OF
THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.
ON THE CRITICISM AND INTERPRETATION OF THE
SCRIPTURES.
C^RITICISM, in the more extensive sense of the term, is the art of
forming a correct, judgment concerning any object proposed to our
consideration. In a more restricted sense, particularly with reference
to the works of antient authors, it was fashionable, for a considerable
time, among the literati on the continent of Europe, to employ this
term as indicating merely that kind of labour and judgment, which
was employed in settling the genuineness of the whole or part of the
text of any author. But the term is now generally used in a much
more enlarged sense, viz. to indicate any kind of labour or judgment,
which is occupied either in the literary history of the text itself or ira
settling or explaining it. To the former the German philosophers
have given the appellation of lower criticism,- while the latter has been
tei med Jughei criticism, because its objects and results are of a much
more important nature. l In this latter sense, the term is taken in
the present volume, which is devoted to the consideration of the
Criticism and Interpretation of the Holy Scriptures.
The FIRST PART, which treats on Scripture Criticism, will be
found to comprise a concise account of the languages in which the
Sacred Volume is written ; a sketch of its. literary history, and of the
several divisions and subdivisions of it, which have obtained at different
times, The nature of various readings, and the means of determin-
ing genuine readings, will next be considered, together with the
quotations from the Old Testament in the New, and the nature and
different kinds of Harmonies of the Old and New Testament.
In the SECOND PART the principles and subsidiary means of Scrip-
ture Interpretation are discussed, together with the application of
them to the exposition of the Sacred Volume, both exegetical and
practical.
1 Muntiuglie, Brevis Expositio Criticcs Vet. Focd, pp. 1, 2. Jalm'a Dissertations,
by Piof, Stuart, pp. t>M, GS, Cleric-i AIM Cntica, pp. 1, 2.
VOL. H. *B
On the Original Languages ofSctiptwe. [Part I. Ch.
PART I.
ON SCRIPTURE CRITICISM.
CHAPTER I.
ON THE LANGUAGES IN WHICH THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS
ARE WRITTEN.
A KNOWLEDGE of the original languages of Scripture is of
the utmost importance, and indeed absolutely necessary, to him who
is desirous of ascertaining the genuine meaning of the Sacred Vo-
lume. Happily, the means of acquiring these languages are now
so numerous and easy of access, that the student, who wishes to
derive his knowledge of the Oracles of God from pure sources, can
be at no loss for guides to direct him in this delightful pursuit.
SECTION I.
ON THE HEBREW LANGUAGE.
Introductory Remarks on the Oriental or Shemitish Languages.
I. Origin of the Hebtetu Language II. Historical Sketch of this
Language. III. And of its Characters. IV. Of the Votael Points.
C( J.~HE languages of Western Asia, though differing in respect to
dialect, are radically the same, and have been so, as far back as any
historical records enable us to trace them. Palestine, Syria, Phoeni-
cia, Mesopotamia, Babylonia, Arabia, and also Ethiopia are reckoned
as the countries., where the languages commonly denominated Oz-
ental have been spoken. Of late, many critics have rejected the ap-
pellation t Oriental, 1 as being too comprehensive, and substituted
that of ' Shemitish,' a denominative derived from Shem. To this,
however, objections of a similar nature may be urged ; for no incon-
siderable portion of those, who spoke the languages in question, were
not descendants of Shem. It is matter of indifference which ap-
pellation is used, if it be first defined.
The Oriental Languages may be divided into three principal
dialects, viz. the Aramaean, the Hebrew, and the Arabic.
1. The Aramaean, spoken in Syria, Mesopotamia, and Babylonia
or Chaldaea, is subdivided into the Syriac and Chaldee dialects ; or,
as tireyare sometimes called, the East and West Aramsean.
2. The Hebrew or Canaanitish (Isa. xix. 18.) was spoken in
Palestine, and probably with little variation in Phrenicia, and the
Phoenician colonies, as at Carthage and other places,
I. Sect. I.] On the Hebrew Language.
*
3. The Arabic, to which the Ethiopia bears a special resemblan
has, in modern times, a great variety of dialects, as a spoken L
guage, and is spread over a vast extent of country. But, so far
we are acquainted with its former state, it appears more antiently
have been principally limited to Arabia and Ethiopia.
The Arabic is very rich in forms and words; the Syriac, so
as it is yet known, is comparatively limited in both ; the Hebr
holds a middle place between them, both as to copiousness of woi
and variety of forms." l
Besides the preceding dialects, there are many slighter variatic
of language, sometimes distinguished from the general names
local appellations. Thus, the Ephraimites could not distingu
between the letters D (s) and & (sh), as the Hebrews did, in spes
ing : hence the Ephraimites pronounced Szbboleth instead of S&
boleth. (Judges xii. 6.) Nehemiah was indignant, that part
his countrymen should speak the language of Ahhdod. (Neh. x
2325.)
The Samaritan dialect appears to be composed (as one mig
expect, see 2 Kings xvii.) of Aiamaean and Hebrew: and t
slighter varieties of Arabic are as numerous as the provinces whc
the language is spoken.
I. ORIGIN or THE HEBREW LANGUAGE.
Of all the Oriental Languages, the HEBREW bears marks of bei
the most antient : in this language the Old Testament is writtc
with the exception of a few words and passages that are in t
Chaldacan dialect. Q According to some critics, it derived its nar
from Heber, one of the descendants of Shem (Gen. x. 21. 25.
14. 16, 17.): but other learned men are of opinion that it is d
rived from the root "OV (AB^R), to pass over, whence Abraham w
denominated the Hebrew (Gen. xiv, 13.), having passed over t
river Euphrates to come into the land of Canaan. This last oj
nion appears to be best founded, from the general fact that t
most antient names of nations were appellative, " But, whatev
extent of meaning was attached to the appellation Hebrew, befc
the time of Jacob, it appears afterwards to have been limited or
to his posterity, and to be synonymous with Israehte.
The origin of the Hebrew Language must be dated farther ba
than the period, to which we can trace the appellation Hebrew.
is plain, from the names of persons and places in Canaan, th
wherever Abraham sojourned, he found a language in which
could easily converse, viz. the Hebrew or Phoenician languag<
That this was originally the language of Palestine, appears plain fn
the names of nations being appellative, and from other facts in resp<
to the formation of this dialect. Thus, the West is, in Hebrew t
(YUM), which means the sea, that is, towards the Mediterranean S
As the Hebrew has no other proper word for west) so it must
1 Stuart's Hebicw Giammai, pp, 1, 2.
- Besides some Cluildee woids occasionally inserted in the historical and piophct
books, after tin- Israelites became; acquainted with the Babylonians, the following pasu
of the Old Testament aie wnttcn in tbe Chaldee dialect, -viz. Jer. x. 11. Dan. ii. 4
the end of chap. vii. and Ezraiv, 8. to vi. 19. and vii. 12. to 17.
B 2
4 On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
evident that the language, in its distinctive and peculiar forms, must
have been formed in Palestine. 1
The Jewish Rabbins, Jonathan the author of the Chaldee Para-
phrase, Solomon Jarchi, and Aben-Ezra, have affirmed that Hebrew
was the primitive language spoken in Paradise ; and their opinion
has been adopted by Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and some other
fathers, as well as by some modern critics and philologers,. Huet,
however, and the majority of modern critics, are of opinion, that
the language spoken by Adam perished in the confusion of
tongues at Babel. But it seems highly probable, that if the original
parents of mankind were placed in "Western Asia, they spoke sub-
stantially the language which has for more than fifty centuries per-
vaded that country. 2 Without adopting, therefore, the hypothesis
just stated, which rests only on bare probabilities, we may observe
that the Hebrew is the most antient of all the languages in the
world; at least we Icnow of none that is older: that it is not im-
probable that it was the general language of men at the dispersion ;
and, however it might have subsequently been altered and improved,
that it appears to be the original of all the languages, or rather
dialects, which have since arisen in the world. 3
Various circumstances, indeed, combine to prove that Hebrew
is the original language, neither improved nor deba&ed by foreign
idioms. The words of which it is composed are very short, and
admit of very little flexion, as may be seen on reference to any
Hebrew grammar or lexicon. The names of persons and places are
descriptive of their nature, situation, accidental circumstances, &c.
The names of brutes express theii nature and properties more sig-
nificantly and more accurately than any other known language in
the world. The names also of various antient nations are of He-
brew origin, being derived from the sons or grandsons of IShuni,
Ham, and Japhet ; as the Assyrians from Ashur ; the Elamites from
Elam; the Aramaeans from Aram; the Lydians from Liul; the
Cimbrians or Cimmerians from Gomer ; the Medians from Machii,
the son of Japhet; the loniatts from Javan, &c. 4 Fmther, the
names given to the heathen deities suggest an additional proof of
the antiquity and originality of the Hebrew language ; thus, Japetus
is derived from Japhet; Jove, from JEHOVAH; Vulcan, from Tubul-
Cain, who first discovered the use of iron and brass, &c. &c. Lastly,
the traces of Hebrew which are to be found in very many other
languages, and which have been noticed by several learned men,
afford another argument in favour of its antiquity and priority.
These vestiges are particularly conspicuous in the Chaldee, Syriac,
Arabic, Persian, Phoenician, and other languages spcfkcu by the
people who dwelt nearest to Babylon, where the first division of
languages took place. 5
' " - - - - - ^__
1 part's Heb. Gram. p. 5-
* Hoef, Demonjtr. Evang. Prop. IV. c. 13, After, Hcrmcneut. Vet. Ttibt, torn, i.
p. 321. Sort's Heb. Giam, p 6.
s Dr. 0r. Sharpe's Dissertations on the Origin of Languages, &c, pp, 22. ft spa.
GrotiuB de Ventete, lib.i. sect. 16. Walton's Prolegomena to the London Poly-
glott, prol ni. s, (p. 76. ed. Dathii.) 5 Walton, Prol. in. 7, 8. (pp. 76, 77.)
I. Sect. I.] On the Hebrew Language.
The knowledge of the Hebrew language was diffused very wi
by the Phoenician merchants, who had factories and colonie!
almost every coast of Europe and Asia; that it was identically
same as was spoken in Canaan, or Phoenicia, is evident iron
being used by the inhabitants of that country from the tinn
Abraham to that of Joshua, who gave to places mentioned in the
Testament, appellations which aiepure Hebrew; such are, IChi
scpher, or the city of books, and Kinath-sannah, or the city of le
tng. (Josh. xv. 15. 49.) Another proof of the identity of the
languages arises fiom the circumstance of the Hebrews conver
with the Canaanites without an interpreter; as the spies sent
Joshua with Rahab (Josh, ii.); the ambassadors sent by the Gib
ites to Joshua (Josh. ix. 3 25.), &c. But a still stronger proc
the identity of the two languages is to be found in the fragmenl
the Punic tongue which occur in the writings of antient auth
That the Carthaginians (Poem) derived their name, origin,
language from the Phoenicians, is a well-known and authentic,
fact; and that the latter sprang from the Canaanites might easiV
shown from the situation of their country, as well as from t
manners, customs, and ordinances. Not to cite the testimonie
profane authors on this point, which have been accumulated
Bishop Walton, we have sufficient evidence to prove that they i
considered as the same people, in the fact of the Phoenicians
Canaanites being used promiscuously to denote the inhabitant
the same country. Compare Exod, vi. 15. with Gen. xlvi. 10.
Exod. xvi. 33. with Josh. v. 12., in which passages, for the Hel
words translated Canaanitish and land of Canaan, the Septua
reads Phoenician and the country of Phoenicia.
II. HISTORICAL SKETCH or THE HEBREW LANGUAG-E,
The period from the age of Moses to that of David has I
considered the golden age of the Hebrew language, which decl
in purity from that time to the reign of Hezekiah or Manasseh, 1
ing received several foreign woidb from the commercial and poll
intercourse of the Jews and Israelites with the Assyrians and B:
loniaus. This period has been termed the silver age of the Hel
language. In the interval between the reign of Hezekiah and
Babylonish captivity, the puiity of the language was neglected,
so many foreign words were introduced into it, that this period
not inaptly been designated its iion age. During the seventy yi
captivity, though it does not appear that the Hebrews entirely
their native tongue, yet it underwent ao considerable a change 1
their adoption of the vernacular languages of the countries w
they had resided, that afterwards, on their return from exile,
spoke a dialect of Chaldee mixed with Hebrew words. On
account, it was, that, when the Hebrew Scriptures were reac
was found necessary to interpret them to the people in the Chald
language; as, when Ezra the scribe brought the book of the la
Moses before the congregation, the Levites are said to have ca
the people to understand the law, because they read in the boot
the law of God, distinctly, AND GAVE THE SENSE, AND CAUSED T
B 3
6 ' On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
TO UNDERSTAND THE HEADING (Neh. viii. 8. 1 ). Some time after
the return from the great captivity 3 Hebrew ceased to be spoken
altogether : though it continued to be cultivated and studied, by the
priests and Levites, as a learned language, that they might be enabled
to expound the law and the prophets to the people, who, it appears
from the New Testament, were well acquainted with their general
contents and tenor; this last-mentioned period has been called the
leaden age of the language. 2 " How long the Hebrew was retained,
both In writing and conversation ; or in writing, after it ceased to
be the language of conversation, it is impossible to determine. The
coins, stamped in the time of the Maccabees, are all the oriental
monuments we have, of the period that elapsed between the latest
canonical writers, and the advent of Christ ; and the inscriptions on
these are. in Hebrew. At the time of the Maccabees, then, Hebrew
was probably understood, at least, as the language of books : per-
haps, in some measure, also, among the better informed, as the lan-
guage of conversation. But soon after this, the dominion of the
Seleucidae, in Syria, over the Jewish nation, uniting with the former
influence of the Babylonish captivity, in promoting the Aramaean
dialect^ appears to have destroyed the remains of proper Hebrew,
as a living language, and to have universally substituted, in its stead,
the Hebrseo- Aramaean, as it was spoken, in the time of our Saviour.
Prom the time when Hebrew ceased to be vernacular, down to the
present day, a portion of this dialect has been preserved in the Old
Testament. It has always been the subject of study among learned
Jews. Before and at the time of Christ, there were nourishing Jewish
academies at Jerusalem; especially under Hillel and Shammai.
After Jerusalem was destroyed, schools were set up in various places,
but particularly they flourished at Tiberias, until the death of II.
Judah, surnamed HaMcodesh or the Holy, the author of the Mishna;
about A. D. 230. Some of his pupils set up other schools in Baby-
lonia, which became the rivals of these. The Babylonish academics
flourished until near the tenth centuiy." 3 From" the academies at
Tiberias and in Babylonia, we have received the Targunw, the Tal-
mud, the Masora (of all which an account will be found in tlm course
of the present volume), and the written vowels and accents of the
Hebrew language. The Hebrew of the Talmud and of the llabbius
has a close affinity with the later Hebrew.
III. ANTIQUITY OF THE HEBREW CHARACTERS.
The present Hebrew Characters, or Letters, are twenty-two in
T^^i!S!7 k **"? * lie * b ve l )ract ' ce exists at the I""* tiino > ~
Jews, at Sympheropol, ln Cnm Tartary, where the
. , . :o ~j. uunaLiuuo a* aravancore, in tic Uiast lliclieq whwo tlm t,',,,u,,,,
^asss^issss^sEs
r ' 3 i5tiiai-t's Heh. Gi^ra, p, la.
1. Sect. 1.] Un the fieorew
number, and of a square form : but the antiquity of these letters is
a point that has been most severely contested by many learned men.
From a passage in Eusebius's Chronicle 1 , and another in Jerome 2 ,
it was inferred by Joseph Scaligcr, that Ezra, when he reformed the
Jewish church, transcribed the antient characters of the Hebrews
into the square letters of the Chaldaeans : and that this was done for
the use of those Jews, who, being born during the captivity, knew
no other alphabet than that of the people among whom they had
been educated. Consequently, the old character, which we call the
Samaritan, fell into total disuse. This opinion Scaliger supported
by passages from both the Talmuds, as well as from rabbinical
writers, in which it is expressly affirmed that such characters were
adopted by Ezra. But the most decisive confirmation of this point
is to be found in the antient Hebrew coins, which were struck before
the captivity, and even previously to the revolt of the ten tribes. The
characters engraven on all of them are manifestly the same with the
modern Samaritan, though with some trifling variations in their
forms, occasioned by the depredations of time. These coins, whether
shekels or half shekels, have all of them, on one side, the golden
manna-pot (mentioned in Exod. xvi. 32, 33.), and on its mouth, or
over the top of it, most of them have a Samaritan Aleph, some an
Aleph and Schm, or other letters, with this inscription, The Shekel of
Israel, in Samaritan chaiacters. On the opposite side is to be seen.
Aaron's rod with almonds, and in the same letters this inscription,
Jerusalem the holy. Other coins are extant with somewhat different
inscriptions., but the same characters are engraven on them all."
The opinion originally produced by Scaliger, and thus decisively
corroborated by coins, has been adopted by Casaubon, Vossius,
Grotius, Bishop Walton, Louis Cappel, Dr. Prideaux, and other
eminent biblical critics and plulologers, and is now generally re-
ceived : it was, however, very strenuously though unsuccessfully
opposed by the younger Buxlorf, who endeavoured to prove, by a
variety of passages from rabbinical writers, that both the square and
the Samaritan characters were antiontly used; the present square
character being that in which the tables of the law, and the copy depo-
sited in the ark, were written ; and the other characters being employed
in the copies of the law which were mude for private and common
use, and m civil affairs in general ; and that, after the captivity,
Ezra enjoined the former to be used by tbti Jews on all occasions,
leaving the latter to the Samaritans and apostates. Independently,
however, of the strong evidence against Buxtorf's hypothesis, which
is afforded by the antient Hebrew coins, when we consider the impla-
cable enmity that subsisted between the Jews and Samaritans, is it
ference between the Clmldee (or square) and the Samaritan letters
1 Sub anno 4710. 9 p raj f. i,, i u eg<
Walton, Pro! in. 29-37. (pp. 103 IMS,) Cttvpzov, CriUea Sicrn, up. ayfi M11.
Cnticji Sacia, pp, m 127,
JJ 4.
8 ' On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Cli.
with respect to convenience and beauty, is calmly considered, it
must be acknowledged that they never could have been used at tlie
same time. After all, it is of no great moment which of these, or
whether either of them, were the original characters, since it does
not appear that any change of the words has arisen from the manner
of writing them, because the Samaritan and Hebrew Pentateuchs
almost always agree, notwithstanding the lapse of so many ages.
Tt is most probable that the form of these characters has varied at
different periods : this appears from the direct testimony of Mont-
faucon \ and is implied m Dr, Kenmcott's making the characters,
in which manuscripts are written, one test of their age. <J It js, how-
ever, certain that the Chaldee or square character was the common
one : as in Matt. v. 8. the yod is referred to as the smallest letter in
the alphabet. It is highly probable that it was the common cha-
racter, when the Septuagint version was made 5 because the depart-
ures in the Hebrew text from that version, so far as they have
respect to the letters, can mostly be accounted for, on the ground,
that the square characters were then used, and that the final letters
which vary from the medial or initial form, were then wanting, 11
IV, ANTIQUITY OF THE HEBREW VOWEL POINTS.
But however interesting these inquiries may be in a philological
point of view, it is of far greater importance to be satisfied con-
cerning the much litigated, and yet undecided, question respecting
the antiquity of the Hebrew points ; because, unless the student has
determined for himself, after a rnatuie investigation, he cannot with
confidence apply to the study of this sacred language. Tluee opi-
nions have been offered by learned men on this subject. By some,
the origin of the Hebiew vowel points is maintained to be coeval
with the Hebrew language itself: while otheis assert them to have
been first introduced by Ezra after the Babylonish captivity, when
he compiled the canon, transcribed the books into the present Chul-
dee characters, and restored the purity of the Hebrew text. A third
hypothesis is, that they were invented, about five hundred years
after Christ, by the doctors of the school of Tiberias, for the purpose
of marking and establishing the genuine pronunciation, for the con-
venience of those who were learning the Hebrew tongue. This
opinion, first announced by Rabbi Elias Levita in the beginning of
the sixteenth century, has been adopted by Cappel, Calvin, Luther,
Casaubon, Scaliger, Masclef, Erpenius, Houbigant, L'Advocat,
Bishops Walton, Hare, and Lowth, Dr. Kennicott, Dr. Gulden,
and other eminent critics, British and foreign, and is now generally
received, although some few writers of respectability continue stre-
nuously to advocate their antiquity. The Jrcanum Pwctationis
Revelatum of Cappel was opposed by Buxtorf in a treatise De Punc-
tonvm Vocalium Anhquitat^ by whom the controversy was almost
exhausted. We shall briefly state the evidence on both sides.
1 Hexapla Origenis, torn. i. pp. 22. et sey.
8 Dissertation on the Hebrew Text, vol. i, pp. 310314..
3 Stuart's Hebrew Grammar, p. 1 6.
I. Sect I.] On the Hebrew Language* 9
That the vowel points are of modern date, and of human inven-
tion, the anti-punctists argue from the following considerations :
1. " The kindred, Shemitish languages antiently had no written vowels.
The most antient Estrange] o and Kufish characters, that is, the ancient
characters of the Syrians and Arabians, were destitute of vowels. The
Palmyrene inscriptions, and nearly all thePhemcian ones, are destitute of
them. Some of the Maltese inscriptions, however, and a few of the Phe-
nician have marks, which probably were intended as vowels. The Koran
was confessedly destitute of them, at first. The punctuation of it occa-
sioned great dispute among Mohammedans. In some of the older Syriac
wntings, is found a single 1 point, which by being placed in different posi-
tions in regai d to words, served as a diacritical sign. The pi c^ent vowel
system of the Syrians was introduced so late as the time of Theophilus
and Jacob of Edcssa. (Cent, vui.) The Aiabic vowels were adopted,
soon after the Koran was written, but their other diacritical marks did
nol come into use, until they were introduced by Ibn Molcla, (about A.D.
900,) together with the Nislu chaiacter, now in common use." l
9 The Samaritan letters, which (we hive already seen) weie the same
with the Hebrew characters before the captivity, have no points ; nor
are there any vestiges whatever of vowel points to be traced either in.
the shekels stiuck by the kings of Israel, or in the Samaritan Pentateuch.
The words have always been lead by the aid of the four letters Aleph,
He, Vau, and Jod, which aic called malres lectwms, or motheis of reading.
3. The copies of the Scupturcs used in the Jewish synagogues to the
present time, and which aie accounted particularly sacied, are constantly
wiittcn without points, or any distinctions of verses whatever : a practice
that could never have been intioduced, nor would it have been so reli-
giously followed, if vowel points had been coeval with the language,
or of divine authority. To this fact we may add, that in many of the
oldest and best manuscripts, collated and examined by Dr. Kenmcott,
either there arc no points at all, or they are evidently a late addition ;
and that all the antient various readings, marked by the Jews, regard
only the letters , not one of them relates to the vowel points, which
could not have happened if these had been in use.
4 Rabbi Elias Levita ascribes the invention of vowel points to the
doctors of Tiberias, and IMS conninicd the fact by the authoiity of the
most leained rabbins.
5. The antient Cabbal^ta 2 draw all their mysteries from the letters;
but none from the vowel points ; which they could not have neglected if
they had been acquainted with them. And hence it is concluded, that the
points were notin cxistenccwhcn the Cabbalistic intcipretationsweiemade.
6. Although the Talmud contains the determinations of the Jewish
doctors concerning many passages of the law, it is evident that the points
i Stuart's Hobiew Graimnai, p. 19.
" The Cabbabsts were a, set of labbinical doctois among the Jews, who derived their
name from their studying tlio Cabbala, a inystenovis Kind of Ncionce, comprising inystii'al
interpretations of Scripture, and metaphysical speculations concerning the Deity and other
bcmgb, which arc found in Jewish writings, and are bind to have been bunded down by a
secret tradition 1'iom the e.uhust ages. By considering the numeral powers of the letters
of the sacred text, and chnnging and tiansposing them in various ways, according to the
rules of then aitj the Cabbalints extracted semes from the suciod oracles, very rlillbi cut
from those which the expressions boemod natuudly to import, or which wcie even intended
by their inhpired authoia. Some learned men have imagined, that the Cabbalists aiose
soon alter the time of Ezia ; but the truth is, that no Cabbalistic writings aic extant but
what are pasteriui to the destruction of the second temple For an entertaining account
of the Cabbala, and of the Cubbahstk'al philosophy, BCU Mi. Allen's Modern Judaism,
l>p, 65 P'l.,ovDi. Eulicld's Ilktoiy of Philosophy, vol. h. pp. 190 221.
]0 On the Original Languages of bcnjmtic. LJT.UI A. ^n.
were not affixed to the text when the Talmud was composed ; because
there ave several disputes concerning the sense of passages of the law,
which could not have been controverted if the pointsjmd then been in
existence. Besides, the vowel points are ncvei mentioned, though the
fairest opportunity for noticing them offered itself, if they had really then
been in use. The compilation of the Talmud was not finished until the
7. The antient various leadings, called Ken and Ketib, or Khctibh,
(which weie collected a short time befoie the completion of the Talmud,)
relate entnely to consonants and not to vowel points , yet, if these had ex-
jsted m manuscript at the time the Ken and Khctib were collected, it is
obvious that some reference would directly or indirectly have been made to
them. The silence, therefore, of the collectors of these vaiious rcudingb
is a cleai proof of the non-existence of vowel points in their time.
8. The antient versions, for instance, the Chaldce paraphiasos of
Jonathan and Onkelos, and the Greek versions of Aquila, Synitnucluis,
and Theodotion, but especially the Septuagmt version, nil read the textj
in many passages, m senses diffei cnt from that which the points determine
them to mean. Whence it is evident, that if the points had then been
known, pointed manuscripts would have been followed as the moat cor-
rect; out as the authors of those versions did not use them', it is a plain
proof that the points were not then in being,,
9. The antient Jewish writeis themselves are totally silent concerning
the vowel points, which suiely would not have been the case if they had
been acquainted .with them. Much stiess indeed has been laid upon the
books of Zohai and Bahir, but these have been proved not to have been
known for a thousand yeais after the buth of Christ. Even Buxlorf him-
self admits, that the book Zohar could not have been wiitten till after the
tenth century ; and the rabbis Gedaliah and Zachet confess that it was not
mentioned before the yeai 1290, and that it presents internal evidence that
it is of a much later date than is pietendecl. It is no uncommon practice
of the Jews to publish books of recent date under the names of old wrilei f>,
in order to rendei their authority lespectable, and even to altci and intei-
polate antient writers in order to subserve then own views.
10. Equally silent are the antient fatheis of the Christian church, Orison
and Jerome. In some fragments still extant, of Ongen's vast biblical
work, intitled the Hexapla (of which some account is given in a subse-
quent page), we have a specimen of the mannei in which Hebrew was
pronounced in the thud century; and which, it appears, wn& widely dif-
ferent from that which results flora adopting the Masorclic reading,
Jerome also, in various parts of his works, whcie he notices the difl'erunt
pronunciations of Hebrew words, treats onlyqfthelcttcts, and nowhere
mentions the points, which he surely would have done, had they bucn
found in the copies consulted by him.
11. The letters ft, n, V ' (Aleph, He, Vau, and Yod), upon the plan of
the Masorites, are termed gmescent, because, accoiding to them, (hey
have no sound. At othei times, these same letters indic-nte a variety of
sounds, as the fancy of these critics has been pleased to distinguish lliom
by points. This single circumstance exhibits the whole doctrine of points
as the^ laseless fabric of a vision. To suppress altogether, 01 to lender
insignificant, a radical letter of any word, in order to supply itt> place by
an arbitrary dot or a fictitious mark, is an invention fraught with the
grossest absurdity. 2
1 For an account of the Talmud, sac Pmtll. Book! UiqTfl7s^i."l7 JTw/H."
2 Wilson's Elements of Hebiew Gramma j, p. 45,
I. Sect L] On tlic Hebrew Language. 1 1
12. Lastly, as facfast vestiges of the points that can be traced a^p lobe
found in the writings of Rabbi Ben Ashcr, president of the western school,
and of Rabbi Ben Naphlhah, chief of the eastern school, who flourished
about the middle of the tenth century, we are justified in assigning that as
the epoch when the system of vowel points was established.
Such are the evidences on which the majority of the learned rest
their convictions of the modern date of the Hebrew points : it now
remains, that we concisely notice the arguments adduced by the
Buxtorfs and their followers, for the antiquity of those points.
1. From the nature of all languages it is uigcd that they require vowels,
which are in a mannei the soul of words. This is icudily conceded as an
indisputable truth, but it is no proof of the antiquity of the vowel points :
for the Hebicw language always had and still has vowels, independent of
the points, without which it may be read, Origen, who tianscribed the
Hebiew Scriptures in Greek characters in his Iluxapla, did not invent
new vowels to expre&s the vowels absent in Hebicw words, neither did
Jerome, who also expic&scd many Hebiew words and pasbagcs in Latin
characters. The Samaritans, who used the same alphabet as the Hebrews,
rend without the vowel points, employing the mattes lecthnu, Aloph, He
or Hheth, Jod, Oin, and Vau (a, c, i, o, n), for vowels ; and the Hebrew
may be read in the same manner, with the assistance of these letters, by
supplying them wheic the}' arc not cxpicssed, agreeably to the modern
practice of the Jews, whose Talmud and rabbinical commentators, as well
as the copies of the law preserved in the synagogues, are to this day read
Without vowel points.
2. It is objected that the reading of Hebrew would be rendered very
uncertain and difficult without the points, after the language ceased lo bo
spoken. To this it is replied, that even after Hebiew ceased to be a
vernacular language, its tiue reading might have been continued among
learned men to whom it was. familiar, and also in their schools, which flou-
rished befoie the invention of the points. And thus daily practice in
reading, as well as a consideration of the context^ would enable them not
only to fix the meaning of doubtful words, but also to supply the vowels
which were deficient, and likewise- to tix woids to one detci minute leading.
Cappel ', and after him Mabclct' 2 , have given some general i ulus for the ap-
plication of the mutter lection is, to enable us to re-id Hcbi ew without points.
3. " Many Piotchtunt writers have been led lo support thu authority of
the points, by the supposed uncertainty of the unpointed text ; which
would oblige us to follow the direction of the church of Rome. This JT-
guinent, however, makes against those who would suppose Kxra to have
introduced the points . for in that cast 1 , from Moses to his day the text
being unpointed must have been obscure and uncertain ; and if this wore
not so, why should not the; unpointed text have remained intelligible and
unambiguous after his, time, as, it had done before it ? This argument,
moreover, giants \vhat they who use it arc not aware of: for if it bo allowed
that the unpointed text is ambiguous and uneoituin, and would oblige us
in consequence to iccur to the church of Rome, the Roman Catholics
may prove at least with every appearance of truth that it 1ms always
been unpointed, and that, tberufoie, wo must have recourse to the church
to explain it. Many writers of iliul communion have had tho candour to
acknowledge, that the unpointed Hebrew text can bo read and underload
like the Samaritan text ; for although several words in Ilebiew msiy, when
1 Ai'Lunnm Punctutionis ruvclatiun, lib, i. c. in
D Giaitiniaticn Ilebuku, vol. i, cap 1. <J iv.
12 On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part L Ch.
separate, admit of different interpretations, the context usually fixes their
meaning with precision 1 ; or, if it ever fail to do so, and leave their mean-
in* still ambiguous, recourse may be had to the interpretations ot antient
translators or commentators. We must likewise remember, that the Ma-
sorites in affixing points to the text, did not do so according to their own
notions how it ought to be read; they followed the received reading of
their day, and thus fixed unalterably that mode of reading which was au-
thorised among them: and, therefore, though we reject these points as
their invention, and consider that they never were used by any inspired
writer, yet it by no means follows, that for the interpretation of Scripture we
must go to a supposed infallible church ; for we acknowledge the divine
original of what the points express, namely, the sentiments conveyed by
the letters and words of the sacred text." 2
4. In further proof of the supposed antiquity of vowel points, some
passages have been adduced from the Talmud, in which accents and verses
are mentioned. The fact is admitted, but it is no proof of the existence
of points ; neither is mention of certain words in the Masoretic notes, as
being irregularly punctuated, any evidence of their existence or antiquity :
for the Masora was not finished by one author, nor in one century, but
that system of annotation was commenced and prosecuted by various
Hebrew critics through several ages. Hence it happened that the latter
Masorites, having detected mistakes in their predecessors (who had
adopted the mode of pronouncing and reading used in their day), were
unwilling to alter such mistakes, but contented themselves with noting
particular words as having been irregularly and improperly pointed.
These notes, therefore, furnish no evidence of the existence of points be-
fore the time of the first compilers of the Masora. a
The preceding are the chief arguments usually urged for and
against the vowel points : and from an impartial consideration of
them, the reader will be enabled to judge for himself. The weight
of evidence, we apprehend, will be found to determine against them :
nevertheless, " the points seem to have their uses, and these not in-
considerable ; and to have this use among others that, as many of
the Hebrew letters have been corrupted since the invention of the
points, and as the points subjoined originally to the true letters have
been in many of these places regularly preserved, these points will
frequently concur in proving the truth of such corruptions, and will
point out the method of correcting them." 4
A Bibliographical Account of the principal editions of the He-
brew Bible will be found in the Appendix to this volume, pp.4 10.,
and of- the principal Hebrew Grammars and Lexicons^ both with and
without points, in pp. 158 167.
1 Thus the English verb to skin has two opposite meanings ; but the context will
always determine which it bears in any passage where it occurs.
2 Hamilton's Introd. to the Study of the Hebrew Scriptures, pp. 44, 45,
a Walton Prol.iii. 3856. (pp. 125170.) Carpzov, Crit. Sacr, Vet. Te&t parti.
c. v. sect. vii. pp. 242274, Pfeiffer, Critica Sacra, cap.iv. sect, ii, (Op. pp.704 71]
jewel's Institutes, pp. 3238. Jahn, Introd. ad Vet. Fcedus, pp. 129131. Bauer.
Ctatfcs Sacra, pp. 728 141. Prideaux's Connection, vol. i. parti, book 5. pu,<M7
38!. &b edition. Bishop Marsh (Lectures, partii. pp. 136 HO.) has enumerated the
principal Realises for and against the vowel points; some of which are also specified in
pp. 157, 18. of the Appendix to this volume.
4 Dr. Kennicott, Dissertation i. on Hebrew Text, p. 345,
I. Sect II.] On tlie Greek Language. 13
SECTION II.
ON THE GREEK LANGUAGE,
I. Similarity of the Greek Language of the Netu Testament with that of
the Alexandrian or Septuagint Greek Version. II. The Netu Testa-
ment why written in, Greek. III. Examination of its Style. IV. Its
Dialects Hebraisms Rabbinisms Aramteisms Latinisms Per-
sisms and Cilicisms.
I. SIMILARITY OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTA-
MENT WITH THAT OF THE ALEXANDRIAN Oil SEPTUAGINT GREEK
VERSION.
If a knowledge of Hebrew be necessary and clesirable s in order to
understand the Old Testament aright, an acquaintance with the Greek
language is of equal importance for understanding the New Testa-
ment correctly. It is in this language that the Septuagint version
of the Old Testament was executed : and as the inspired writers of
the New Testament thought and spoke in the Chaldee or Syriac
tongues, whose turns of expression closely corresponded with those
of the antient Hebrew, the language of the apostles and evangelists,
when they wrote in Greek, necessarily resembled that of the trans-
lators of the Septuagint. And as every Jew, who read Greek at all,
would read the Greek Bible, the style of the Septuagint again oper-
ated in forming the style of the Greek Testament. * The Septua-
gint version, therefore, being a new source of interpretation equally
important to the Old and New Testament, a knowledge of the Greek
language becomes indispensably necessary to the biblical stadent.
II. A variety of solutions has been given to the question, WHY THE
NEW TESTAMENT WAS WRITTEN IN GREEK.
The true reason is simply this, that it was the language best
understood both by writers and readers, being spoken and written,
read and understood, throughout the Roman empire, and particu-
larly in the eastern provinces. In fact, Greek was at that time as
well known in the higher and middle circles as the French is in our
day. To the universality of the Greek language, Cicero a , Seneca 3 ,
and Juvenal 4 bear ample testimony : and the circumstances of the
Jews having had both political, civil, and commercial relations with
the Greeks, and being dispersed through various parts of the Roman
empire, as well as their having cultivated the philosophy of the
1 Bishop Marsh's Lectures, part iii, pp. SO, 31. The question relative to the supposed
Hebrew originals of Saint Matthew's Gospel, and of the Epistle to the Hebrews, is
purposely omitted in this place, as it is considered in the subsequent part of this work,
3 Orat, pro Arohia Poeta, c. 10. Gncca legunttir in omnibus fere gentibus , Latnia
suis finibus, cxiguis sane, contincntur. Julius Caesar attests the prevalence of the Greek
language in Gaul. De Bell. Gall. lib. i. c. 29. lib. vi. c. 14. (vol. i, pp. 3. 16 J. edit.
Bipont.)
s In consolat. ad Helviam, c. 6. Quid sibi volant in mediis barbarorum regionibus
Grweai yrbcs ? Quid inter Indos Persa&quc Macedonians scrmo ? Scythia et totus ille
ferarutn indomitarumqiie gentium tractus civitates A chaise, Ponticis impositas litoribus,
oslentnt.
* Nunc totus Graias nostrasquc Imbot orbis Athcnus, Sat. xv, v. 110. Even the fe-
male sex, it appears from the same satirist, made use of Greek as the language of fami-
liarity and passion. See Sat. vi* u 185191.
14 On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I, Ch.
Greeks, of which we have evidence in the New Testament, all suf-
ficiently account for their being acquainted with the Greek language :
-to which we may add the fact, that the Septuagint Greek version of
the Old Testament had been in use among the Jews upwards of two
hundred and eighty years before the Christian aera : which most as-
suredly would not have been the case if the language had not been
familiar to them. And if the eminent Jewish writers, Philo and Jo-
sephus, had motives for preferring to write in Greek (and the very
fact of their writing in Greek proves that that language wus vernacular
to their countrymen), there is no reason at least there is no general
presumption why the first publishers of the Gospel might not use
the Greek language, l But we need not rest on probabilities. For,
1. It is manifest from various passages in the first book of Mac-
cabees, that the Jews of all classes must at that time (n. c, 175 MO)
have understood the language of their conquerors and oppressors',
the Macedonian Greeks under Antiochus, falsely named the Great,
and his successors.
2, Further, when the Macedonians obtained the dominion of
western Asia, they filled that country with Greek cities. The Greeks
also possessed themselves of many cities in Palestine, to which the
Herods added many others, which were also inhabited by Greeks.
Herod the Great, in particular made continual efforts to' give a fo-
reign physiognomy to Judaea ; which country, during the personal mi-
nistry of Jesus Christ, was thus invaded on every side by a Greek popu-
lation. The following particulars will confirm and illustrate this fact.
Aristobulus and Alexander built or restored many cities, which
were almost entirely occupied by Greeks, or by Syrians who spoke
their language. Some of the cities, indeed, which were rebuilt by
the Asmoneean kings, or by the command of Ponipey, were on the
frontiers of Palestine, but a great number of them were in the in-
terior of that country: and concerning these cities we have historical
data which demonstrate that they were very nearly, if not altogether,
Greek. Thus, at Dora, a city of Galilee, the inhabitants refused to
the Jews the right of citizenship which had been granted to them by
Claudius.* Josephus expressly says that Gadara and Hippos art*
Greek cities^ kx\yvtie$ eio-i TroAe^. In the very centre of Ptilastinc
stood Bethshan, which place its Greek inhabitants called foythopolisS
Josephus 5 testifies that Gaza, in the southern part of Jiulaa, was
Greek : and Joppa, the importance of whose harbour induced the
kings of Egypt and Syria successively Jo take it from the Jews ,
' Josephus, de Bell. Jud. Proem, 2. says, "that lie"coinjposod his history of the Jwiflh
war m the language of his country, and afterwards wrote it in Greek for the* iiifiiriiiution
of the Greeks and Romans. The'reader will find a grot number of additional tt'htiuio*
v i r^T f f r the r G T k T 1 ? n 6 u ?ge in the cast, in AntouU Jose-phi liintmm
Epistola Catholica Interlmeahs de Lmgud Originali Novi Twrtameuti mm Utinu &c
P F**Tv i 1 9S ' . Dusseldor P"> I8 -'- ^ b necessary to apprise the reader, that the dtMhtn
of to volume is to support the absurd popish dogma, that the reading of tlu> Holy
fenptuns, * n e vulgar tongue, ought not to fa promiscuously allowed.
4 SJ&TT t nt ' ^* ]i - b> XI ' X< C> ' 5 " 3 Anti Jud ' lib - xvi - c. 1 1. J 4.
* M^niiXit, Judges). 27. (Septuagint Version,) PoJyhius, lib, v. c, 70. 4,
* Josefs, Ant. Jud. lib. xvii, c. 11. 4 *
'
T A -.-. .,. iK. 11. xiv, 34. 2 Mac*
Josephus, Am, Jud, lib- xiii, c, 9. 2 , and hb. xiv. c. 10* QZ
I. Sect II.] On the Greek Language. 15
most certainly could not remain a stranger to the same influence.
Under the reign of Herod the Great, Palestine became still more
decidedly Greek. That prince and his sons erected several cities in
honour of the Caesars. The most remarkable of all these, Caesarea,
(which was the second city in his kingdom,) was chiefly peopled by
Greeks l ; who after Herod's death, under the protection of Nero,
expelled the Jews who dwelt there with them. 2 The Jews revenged
the affront, which they had received at Caesarea, on Gadara, Hippos,
Scythopolis, Askalon, and Gaza, a further proof that the Greeks
inhabited those cities jointly with the Jews. 3 After the death of
Pompey, the Greeks being liberated from all the restraints which
had been imposed on them, made great progress in Palestine under
the protection of Herod ; who by no means concealed his partiality
for them 4 , and lavished immense sums of money for the express
purpose of naturalising their language and manners among the Jews.
With this view he built a theatre and amphitheatre at Csesarea 5 ; at
Jericho an amphitheatre, and a stadium 6 ; he erected similar edifices
at the very gates of the holy city, Jerusalem, and he even proceeded
to build a theatre within its walls. 7
3. The Roman government was rather favourable than adverse to
the extension of the Greek language in Palestine, in consequence of
Greek being the official language of the procurators of that country,
when administering justice, and speaking to the people.
Under the earlier emperors, the Romans were accustomed fre-
quently to make use of Greek, even at Rome, when the affairs of the
provinces were under consideration. 8 If Greek were thus used at
Rome, we may reasonably conclude that it would be still more fre-
quently spoken in Greece and in Asia. In Palestine, in particular,
we do not perceive any vestige of the official use of the Latin lan-
guage by the procurators. We do not find a single instance, either
in the books of the New Testament or in Josephus, in which the Ro-
man governors made use of interpreters: and while use and the affairs
of life accustomed the common people to that language, the higher
classes of society would on many accounts be obliged to make use of it.
4. So far were the religious authorities of the Jews from opposing
the introduction of Greek, that they appear rather to have favoured
the use of that language.
They employed it, habitually, in profane works, and admitted it
into official acts. Au article of the Mischua prohibits the Jews from
writing books in any other language, except the Greek. rj Such a
1 Josephus, do Boll, Jud. lib. iii, c. 9. compared with lib. ii. c. 13. 7.
Q Bell. Jud. lib, ii. c. 14. $4- 3 Ibid. lib. ii. c, 18,
4 Josephus, Ant, Jud. lib. xix. c. 7* 5.
5 Idem. lib. xv. c, 9. compared with lib. xvi. c. 5.
6 Bell. Jud, lib. i. c, 33. G. 8. Ant. Jud. lib. xvii< c. 6.
7 Bell. Jud, lib. i. c. 9, s. 3. Ant. Jud. lib. xv. c. 8. Bcarpov "Sepoffo^vfjiois
MKoftQpnffGv. Compare TCiehhorn dc Judacorum Re Scenica in Comment, Soc. Keg.
Scient. Getting. Vol. II. Class. Antiq. pp. 1013.
B This will account for the Jewish king, Herod Agrippa, and his brother being per-
mitted by the emperor Claudius to be present in the senate, and to address that assembly
in Greek. Dion, Hist, lib. Jx, c, 8,
Mfechna, Tract* Megill, c, 1, 8t
1 s On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part J. Ch.
prohibition would not have been given if they had ^ not been accus-
tomed to write in a foreign language. The act or instrument of di-
vorce might 3 indifferently, be written and signed in Greek or Hebrew :
in either language, and with either subscription, it was valid. 1 During
the siege of Jerusalem, for the first time, some opposition was made
to the use of the Greek language,, when brides were forbidden to
wear a nuptial crown, at the same time that fathers were commanded
to prevent their children thenceforward from learning Greek.'" 2 This
circumstance will enable us readily to understand why Josephus,
when sent by Titus to address his besieged countrymen, spoke to
them ij3paiwv> that is, in the Hebrew dialect, and T*J wotTg/ot) yAoo-o-*), in
his native tongue^: it was not that he might be better heard, but
that he might make himself known to them as their fellow-country-
man and brother.
5. The Greek language was spread through various classes of the
Jewish nation by usage and the intercourse of life. The people, with
but few exceptions, generally understood it, although they continued
to be always more attached to their native tongue. There were at
Jerusalem religious communities wholly composed of Jews who spoke
Greek; and of these Jews, as well as of Greek proselytes, the Chris*
tian church at Jerusalem appears in the first instance to have been
formed. An examination of the Acts of the Apostles will prove these
assertions. Thus, in Acts xxi. 40. and xxii. 2. when Paul, aftor n
tumult, addressed the populace in Hebrew, they kept the wore silence.
They, therefore, evidently expected that he would have spoken to
them in another language, which they would have comprehended 4 ,
though they heard him much better in Hebrew, which they pre-
ferred. In Acts vi. 9, and ix. 29. we read that there were at Jerusalem
whole synagogues of Hellenist Jews, under the name of Cy remans,
Alexandrians, &c. And in Acts vi. 1. we find that these very Hel-
lenists formed a considerable portion of the church in that city. *
From the account given in John xii. 20. of certain Greeks, (whether
they were Hellenistic Jews or Greek proselytes, it is not material to
determine,) who through the apostle Philip requested an interview
with Jesus, it may fairly be inferred that both Philip and Andrew
understood Greek. 6
6. Further, there are extant Greek monuments, containing epi-
1 If the book of divorce bo written in Hebrew, and the names of the witness in Greek
or vice versa, or the name of one witness be in Hebrew and the other in Grwk ~ If ,i
scnbe and witness wrote it, it is kwful.- Ibid. Tract. Gitin. c, D. 8 Uluk '"" lf tt
2 Ibid. Tract. Sotah. c. 9. 14. *
s Bell. Jud. lib. v. c. 9. 2. lib. vi, c. 2. 1.
4 In like manner, it is well known, there are many hundred thousand natives of In-
* nn6 * ntro . duction Critl > e auNouveau Testament, par J. E.
I823< 8v - Dr< Wait>s Translation 0(
' PP' 74 ~79- After, Imtit. Hcmenwfc Nov. Test.
I, Sect. II. J On the Greek Language. 1 7 *
taphs and inscriptions which were erected in Palestine and the neigh-
bouring countries \ as well as antient coins which were struck in the
cities of Palestine, and also in the various cities of Asia Minor. a
What purpose could it answer, to erect the one or to execute the
other, in the Greek language, if that language had not been familiar
indeed vernacular to the inhabitants of Palestine and the neigh-
bouring countries ? There is, then, every reasonable evidence,
amounting to demonstration, that Greek did prevail universally
throughout the Roman empire; and that the common people of
Judaea were acquainted with it, and understood it.
Convincing as we apprehend the preceding facts and evidence will
be found to the unprejudiced inquirer, two or three objections have
been raised against them, which it may not be irrelevant here briefly
to notice.
1. It is objected that, during the siege of Jerusalem, when Titus
granted a truce to the factious Jews just before he commenced his
last assault, he advanced towards them accompanied by an inter-
preter 3 : but the Jewish historian, Josephus, evidently means that the
Roman general, confident of victory, from a sense of dignity, spoke
first, and in his own maternal language, which we know was Latin.
The interpreter, therefore, did not attend him in order to translate
Greek words into Hebrew, but for the purpose of rendering into
Hebrew or Greek the discourse which Titus pronounced in Latin.
2. It has also been urged as a strong objection to the Greek ori-
ginal of the gospels, that Jesus Christ spoke in Hebrew ; because
Hebrew words occur in Mark v. 41. (Talitha cumi}\ vii. 34-. (ph-
phatha); Matt, xxvii. 46. (EU 9 Eli ! Lama sabachthani} 9 and Mark
xv. 34. But to this affirmation we may reply, that on this occasion
the evangelists have noticed and transcribed these expressions in the
original, because Jesus did not ordinarily and habitually speak
Hebrew. But admitting it to be more probable, that the Redeemer
did ordinarily speak Hebrew to the Jews, who were most partial to
their native tongue, which they heard him speak with delight 9 we
may ask in what language but Greek did he address the multi-
tudes, when they were composed of a mixture of persons of different
countries and nations proselytes to the Jewish religion, as well as
heathen Gentiles ? For instance, the Gadarenes (Matt viii. 28 4.
Mark v. 1. Luke viii. 26.) ; the inhabitants of the borders of Tyre
and Sidon (Mark vii. 24.) ; the inhabitants of the Decapolis , the
Syrophcenician woman, who is expressly termed a Greek 9 ij yuv>j
'EAAyjvjc, in Mark vii. 26. ; and the Greeks, 'EAA^vs^, who were de-
sirous of seeing Jesus at the passover. (John xii. 20.) 4
3. Lastly, it has been objected, that, as the Christian churches
were in many countries composed chiefly of the common people,
they did not and could not understand Greek. But not to insist on
1 Antonu Jos, Binterim, Propcmplicurn ad Molfcenbuhrii Problema Criticum,
Sacra Scriptura Novi Testament! in quo idiomate onginalitcr ab apostolis edita fuit?
pp. 27 40. (Moguntiaa, 1822. 8vo,)
3 Ibid. pp. 4044.
3 Josephus, de Bell. Jud. lib. vi. c,6. * Ccll^rier. Essai, p. 249- Hug, vol. ii. p. 54,
VOL , IT. C
18 On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
the evidence already adduced for the universality of the Greek lan-
guage, we may reply, that " in every church there were numbers of
persons endowed with the gifts of tongues, and of the interpretation of
tongues ; who could readily turn the apostles' Greek epistles into
the language of the church to which they were sent. In particular,
the president, or the spiritual man, who read the apostle's Greek
letter to the Hebrews in their public assemblies, could, without
any hesitation, read it in the Hebrew language, for the edification
of those who did not understand Greek. And with respect to the
Jews in the provinces, Greek being the native language of most of
them, this epistle was much better calculated for their use, written
in the Greek language, than if it had been written in the Hebrew,
which few of them understood." Further, " it was proper that all
the apostolical epistles should be written in the Greek language ;
because the different doctrines of the Gospel being delivered and
explained in them, the explanation of these doctrines could with
more advantage, be compared so as to be better understood, being
expressed in one language, than if, in the different epistles, they had
been expressed in the language of the churches and persons to
whom they were sent. Now, what should that one language be, in
which it was proper to write the Christian Revelation, but the Greek,
which was then generally understood, and in which there were many
books extant, that treated of all kinds of literature, and on that
account were likely to be preserved, and by the reading of which
Christians, in after ages, would be enabled to understand the Greek
of the New Testament? This advantage none of the provincial
dialects used in the apostles' days could pretend to. Being limited
to particular countries, they were soon to be disused : and few (if any)
books being written in them which merited to be preserved, the
meaning of such of the apostles' letters as were composed in the
provincial languages could not easily have been ascertained." 1
III. EXAMINATION OF THE STYLE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.
The style of the New Testament has a considerable affinity with
that of the Septuagint version, which was executed at Alexandria 2 ,
although it approaches somewhat nearer to the idiom of the Greek
language ; but the peculiarities of the Hebrew phraseology are dis-
cernible throughout, the language of the New Testament being formed
by a mixture of oriental idioms and expressions with those which are
properly Greek. Hence it has by some philologers been termed
Hebraic-Greek^ and (from the Jews having acquired the Greek lan-
guage, rather by practice than by grammar, among the Greeks, in
whose countries they resided in large communities) Hellenistic-Greek*
The propriety of this appellation was severely contested towards the
close of the seventeenth and in the early part of the eighteenth cen-*
i Dr. Macknight on the Epistles, Pref. to Hebrews, sect.ii. 3. vol.iv. p.336. 4to. edit.
% Michaelis has devoted an entire section to show that the language of the New Testa-
ment lias a tincture of the Alexandrian idiom. Vol. i. pp. 143, et seq. Professor Winer
has given an interesting historical sketch of the Greek Language of the New Testament,
in his Greek Grammar of the New Testament, translated by Professor Stuart and Mr.
Roblnson> pp, 12 35i Andover [North America], 1825, Svo,
I. Sect, IL] On the Greek Language. 1
tury 1 : and numerous publications were written on both sides of the
question, with considerable asperity, which, together with the con-
1 The "controversy on this topic began, very soon after the revival of literature in
Europe. In the sixteenth century, Erasmus and Laurentius Valla ventured to assert
publicly, that ^the Greek of the New Testament is Hellenistic. Many learned men of
that day were inclined to adopt this opinion. But Robert Stephens, in the preface to his
celebrated edition of the New Testament (1576), took it into his head strenuously to
contend for the Attic purity of its dialect. As his Testament was so widely circulated,
the preface served to excite general attention to the subject in question, and to prepare the
minds of critics for the mighty contest which followed. Sebastian Pforscher led the -way,
in his Dialribe de Ling. Greec. N. Tesl. puritate, published in 1629, at Amsterdam; in
which he defends, with great warmth, the purity of the New .Testament Greek. His an-
tagonist was J. Jung, who published in 1640 his Sentential doctissvirorum, de Hellenistis et
Hellenistica Dialecto. To this a icply was made, by J. Grosse of Jena, styled Trias pro-
positionum theol. stilum Nov. Test- a barlans criminationibus vindicantium ,- in which the
whole mass of Hellenists were consigned over to the most detestable heresy. In the same
year, Wulfer wrote an answer to this in his Innocentia Hellenistarum vindicata; to which
Grosse replied, in his Obseruation.es pro triads Observatt. apologeticcs. Muss&us defended
Wulfor (though not in all his positions) in his Disauisitio de stilo NOD. Testament^ A. D.
16-11; to which Grosse replied by a Tertia defensio Triados, 16-41. In 1642, MUSJEUS
fult himself compelled to publish his Vindicice Disyumtiojiis s which however only excited
Grosse to a Quarta defensio Triados.
" About the same time, the controversy was briskly carried on in Holland. D. Hein-
sius, in his Aristarchus Sacer t and his Exercitt. sac. in Nov. Testamentum, had espoused
the cause of Hellenism, and commented upon Pforscher's Diatribe. In a plainer manner
still did he do this, in his Exercitatio de Lingua Hellenistica, published in 1643, In the
very same year, the celebrated Salmasius appeared as his antagoin&t, in three separate
publications, the spirit and tone of which may be readily discerned from their titles. The
first was inscribed Connnentarius controversiam de lingua Hellenistica decidens; the second,
Funus lingua Hellenistic^ / the third, Ossilegium linguae Hellenisticee. In 1648, Ga-
taker, in England, warmly espoused the cause of the Hellenists, in his Dissert, de stilo
Nov. Testamenti. On the same side, about this time, appeared Werenfels, of Switzerland,
in his essay De stylo Script. Nov. Testamenti ; and J. Olearius, of Germany, in his book
De stUo Nov. Testamenti; also Bbckler, in his Tract, De ling. Nov. Test, originali. In
Holland, Vorstius published, in defence of the same side, his book De ffebraismis Nov.
Testamenti, 1658 ; and in 1665, his Comment, de ffebraismis, N. Test. The last was attack-
ed by H. Vhringa, inhis Specimen ahnotatf, ad Philul. Sac. Vorstii. The best of these dis-
sertations were collected and published by Rhenferd in his Syntagma Diss* PhUol* Theol,
de Stilo Nov. Test. 1703 ; and also by Van Honert, about the same time, at Amsterdam.
" J. H. Michaelis, in his essay De tcxlu Nov. Test. Halae, 1707, and H. Blackwall in
his Sacred Classics illustrated and defended, endeavoured to moderate the parties, and to
show, that while it might safely be admitted that there aro Hebraisms in the New Testa-
ment, it may at the same time be mintained, that the Greek of the sacred writers is
entitled to the character of classic purity. But all efforts at peace were defeated by
Gcorgi of Wittemberg, who, in 1732, published his Vindiciez Nov. Test. This was an-
swered by Knapp and Dressing of Leipsic. In 1733, Georgi published his Sierocn^
ticus Sacer, in three books; -and at the end of the year, a second part, in as many more
books ; which were also answered by his Leipsic opponents. From this time, the cause
of the Hellenists began to predominate throughout Europe. And though many essays on
this subject have since appeared, and it has been canvassed in a far more able manner than "
before, yet few of these essays have been controversial ; almost all writers leaning to the
side of Hellenism." Dissertations on the Importance and best Method of studying the
Original Languages of the Bible, by Jahn and others, with Notes by Prof. Stuart, (An-
dover, N. America, 18SU,) pp. 77, 78. Tha reader, who is desirous of investigating the
controversy on the purity of the language of the New Testament, is referred to the
Acroases Academics super Hermeneulica Novi Testamenti of Prof. Morus (vol. i.
pp, 202 233.) ; in whicli he has enumerated the principal writers on each side of the
question. A similar list has been given by Beck ( Monogrammata Hermeneutices Novi
Testamenti, parti, pp. 28 32.), by liumpams (Isagoge ad Lectionem N. T* pp. 33- el
seq.} and by Rambach. (Instit. Herm. Sacree, pp.23. 399.) Dr. Campbell has treated
the subject very ably in the first of his Preliminary Dissertations, prefixed to his version
of the four Gospels; and Wotstein (Libelli ad Crisin atque Interpretation cm N. T.
pp.48 60.) has given some interesting extracts from Origen, Chrysostom, and other
fathers, who were of opinion that the language of the New Testament was not pure
Greek. Other writers might be mentioned, who have treated bibliographically on this
G 2
20 On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
troversy, are now almost forgotten. The dispute, however interest-
ing to the philological antiquarian 3 is, after all, a mere " strife of
words 1 ;" and as the appellation of Hellenistic or Hebraic Greek
is sufficiently correct for the purpose of characterising the language
of the New Testament, it is now generally adopted.
Of this Hebraic style, the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Mark
exhibit strong vestiges : the former presents harsher Hebraisms than
the latter: and the Gospel of St. Mark abounds with still more
striidng Hebraisms. " The epistles of St. James and Jude are some-
what better, but even these are full of Hebraisms, and betray in
other respects a certain Hebrew tone. St. Luke has, in several pas-
sages, written pure and classic Greek, of which the four first verses
of his Gospel may be given as an instance : in the sequel, where he
describes the actions of Christ, he has very harsh Hebraisms, yet
the style is more agreeable than that of St. Matthew or St. Mark.
In the Acts of the Apostles he is not free from Hebraisms, which he
seems to have never studiously avoided; but his periods are more
classically turned, and sometimes possess beauty devoid of art. St.
John has numerous, though not uncouth, Hebraisms both in his
Gospel and epistles: but he has written in a smooth and flowing lan-
guage, and surpasses all the Jewish writers in the excellence of nar-
rative, St. Paul again is entirely different from them all: his style
is indeed neglected and full of Hebraisms, but he has avoided the
concise and verse-like construction of the Hebrew language, and has,
upon the whole, a considerable share of the roundness of Grecian
composition. It is evident that he was as perfectly acquainted with
the Greek manner of expression as with the Hebrew ; and he has
introduced them alternately, as either the one or the other suggested
itself the first, or was the best approved." 3
This diversity of style and idiom in the sacred writers of the
New Testament affords an intrinsic and irresistible evidence for
the^ authenticity of the books which pass under their names. If
their style had been uniformly the same, there would be good rea-
son for suspecting that they had all combined together when they
wrote; or, else, that having previously concerted what they should
teach, one of them had committed to writing their system of doc-
trine. In ordinary cases, when there is" a difference of style in a
work professing to be the production of one author, we have reason
to believe that it was written by several persons. In like manner,
and for the very same reason, when books, which pass under the
names of several authors, are written in different styles, we are au-
thorised to conclude that they were not composed by one person.
topic : but the preceding foreign critics only are speciEed, as their works mav be easily
procured from the Continent. *
KMichaelis ascribes the disputes above noticed either to a want of sufficient know^
ledge of the Greek, the prejudices of pedantry and school orthodoxy, or the injudicious
custom of choosing the Greek Testament as the>rt book to be read by learners of that
Wl Dg ^lJ + r ^ anS ?! ey are S accustol " ed to its singular style, that in a more
tf f&f M^ JFlr'T^ 6 f P crccivin S ics Aviation from the language of the clas-
sics. f!3p ; Marsh s Michaehs, vol. i, p. 211.)
^ Michaelis, vol. i p. 112.
I. Sect. II.] On the Greek Language. 21
Further, If the New Testament had been written with classic
purity i if it had presented to us the language of Isocrates, Demos-
thenes, Xenophon, or Plutarch, there would have been just grounds
for suspicion of forgery ; and it might with propriety have been
objected, that it was impossible for Hebrews, who professed to be
men of no learning, to have written in so pure and excellent a style,
and, consequently, that the books which were ascribed to them must
have been the invention of some impostor. The diversity of style,
therefore, which is observable in them, so far from being any ob-
jection to the authenticity of the New Testament, is in reality a
strong argument for the truth and sincerity of the sacred writers,
and of the authenticity of their writings. "Very many of the Greek
words, found in the New Testament, are not such as were adopted
by men of education^ and the higher and more polished ranks of
life, but such as were in use with the common people. N.ow this
shows that the writers became acquainted with the language, in con-
sequence of an actual intercourse with those who spoke it, rather
than from any study of books: and that intercourse must have
been very much confined to the middling or even lower classes ;
since the words and phrases, most frequently used by them, passed
current only among the vulgar. There are undoubtedly many
plain intimations l given throughout these books, that their writers
were of this lower class, and that their associates were frequently
of the same description ; but the character of the style is the strongest
confirmation possible that their conditions were not higher than
what they have ascribed to themselves." 2 lu fact, the vulgarisms,
foreign idioms, and other disadvantages and defects, which some
critics imagine that they have discovered in the Hebraic Greek of the
New Testament, " are assigned by the inspired writers as the reasons
of God's preference of it, whose thoughts are not our thoughts, nor
his ways our ways. Paul argues, that the success of tlie preachers of
the Gospel, in spite of the absence of those accomplishments in lan-
guage, then so highly valued, was an evidence of the divine power
and energy with which their ministry was accompanied. He did
not address them, he tells us (1 Cor. i. 17.) with the 'wisdom qfwwds,
with artificial periods and a studied elocution, lest the cross of
Christ should be made of none effect; lest to human eloquence that
success should be ascribed, which ought to be attributed to the
divinity of the doctrine and the agency of the Spirit, in the miracles
wrought in support of it. There is hardly any sentiment which he
is at greater pains to enforce. He used none of the enticing or per-
suasive words of man's wisdom* Wherefore ? 6 That their faith
1 It is obvious to cite such passages, as Mark i. 16. ii. 14. Jolmxxi. 3. 7. .where tha
occupations of the Apostles arc plainly and professedly mentioned. It may be more
satisfactory to refer to Actsiii. 6, xviii. 3* xx. 34, 2 Cor* viii. and ixt xi. 6. S, 9. 27, xii.
14, &c. l j hil. ii. 25, iv. 10, &c. 1 Thcss. ii, 6. 9. 2 Thess, xii. 8. 10. Plnlcm. 11. 18. In
these, the attainments, occupations, and associates of the preachers of the Gospel are
indirectly mentioned and alluded to ; and afford a species of undesigned proof, which
seems to repel the imputation of fraud, especially if the circumstance of style be taken
into the account.
a Dr. Maltby's II luxations of the Truth of the Christian llcligion," pp. 10 -12,
c 3
22 On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
might not stand in tlie wisdom of * man, but in tlie power of God.'
(1 Cor. ii. 4, 5.) Should I ask what was the reason why our Lord
Jesus Christ chose for the instruments of that most amazing revolu-
tion in the religious systems of mankind, men perfectly illiterate and
taken out of the lowest class of the people ? Your answer to this
will serve equally for an answer to that other question, Why did
the Holy Spirit choose to deliver such important truths in the bar-
barous idiom of a few obscure Galileans, and not in the politer and
more harmonious strains of Grecian eloquence ? I repeat it, the an-
swer to both questions is the same That it might appear, beyond con-
tradiction, that the excellency of the power was of God, and not of man*" 1
A large proportion, however, of the phrases and constructions of
the New Testament is pure Greek ; that is to say, of the same de-
gree of purity as the Greek which was spoken in Macedonia, and
that in which Polybius wrote his Roman History. Hence the lan-
faage of the New Testament will derive considerable illustration
om consulting the works of classic writers, and especially from
diligently collating the Septuagint version of the Old Testament :
the collections also of Raphelius, Palairet, Bos, Abresch, Ernesti,
and other writers whose works are noticed in the Appendix to this
volume, will afford the biblical student very essential assistance in
explaining the pure Greek expressions of the New Testament ac-
cording to the usage of classic authors. It should further be noticed,
that there occur in the New Testament words that express both
doctrines and practices which were utterly unknown to the Greeks ;
and also words bearing widely different interpretation from those
which are ordinarily found in Greek writers.
IV. The New Testament contains examples of the various DIA-
LECTS occurring in the Greek language, and especially of the Attic ;
which being most generally in use on account of its elegance, per-
vades every book of the New Testament. To these, "some have
added the poetic dialect, chiefly, it should seem, because there arc a
.few passages cited by St. Paul from the antient Greek poets, in Acts
xvn. 28. 1 Cor. xv. 33. and Titi.12. 3 But the sacred writers of
the New Testament being Jews, were consequently acquainted with
the Hebrew idioms, and also with the common as well as with the ap-
propriated or acquired senses of the words of that language. Hence
when they used a Greek word, as correspondent to a Hebrew one
ot like signification, they employed it as the Hebrew word was used
either m a common or appropriated sense, as occasion required.
1 he whole arrangement of their periods is regulated according to
the Hebrew verses (not those in Hebrew poetry, but such as are
found in the historical books); which are constructed in a manner
directly opposite to the roundness of Grecian language, and for want
5 ft (0.Tp. 652*7 Li " ee Hormenc " tica! > P- W- Haflbr Hcnn. Sacra, c. vii.
I. Sect. II.] Hebraisms oftJie New Testament. 23
of variety have an endless repetition of the same particles." l These
peculiar idioms are termed Hebraisms^ and their nature and classes
have been treated at considerable length by various writers. Georgi,
Pfochenius, Blackwall, and others, have altogether denied the ex-
istence of these Hebraisms ; while their antagonists have 3 perhaps
unnecessarily, multiplied them. Wyssius, in his Dialectologia
Sacra, has divided the Hebraisms of the New Testament into thir-
teen classes ; Vorstius 2 into thirty-one classes ; and Viser into eight
classes 3 ; and Masclef has given an ample collection of the Hebra-
isms occurring in the sacred writings in the first volume of his
excellent Hebrew Grammar. 4 The New Testament, however,
contains fewer Hebrew grammatical constructions than the Sep-
tuagint, except in the book of Revelation ; where we often find a
nominative, when another case should have been substituted, - in
imitation of the Hebrew, which is without cases. 5 As the limits
necessarily assigned to this section do not permit us to abridge the
valuable treatises just noticed, we shall here adduce some instances
of the Hebraisms found principally in the New Testament, and shall
offer a few canons by which to determine them with precision.
L Thus, to be called^ to arise, and to lefound> are the same as to be, with
the Hebrews, and this latter is in the Old Testament frequently expressed
by the former. Compare Isa. Ix. 14. 18. Ixi. 3. Ixii. 12. Zech. viii. 3.
Accordingly, in the New Testament, these terras are often employed one for the other,
as in Matt. v. 9. They shall be called the children of God .- and ver. 3 9. He shall be called
the least iti I fie kingdom of Heaven / 1 John iii. 1 , That lue should be called the sons of God.
To be called here and in other places is really to be, and it is so expressed according to
the Hebrew -way of speaking. There is the like signification of the word arise, as in
2 Sam. xi. 20. if the king's wrath arise. Esth. iv. 14. Enlargement and deliverance shall
arise to the Jews. Prov. xxiv. 22, their calamity shall arise suddenly* In all which places
the word arise signifies no other than actual being of existing, according to the Hebrew idiom.
And hence it is used in a similar manner in the New Testament, as in Luke* 1 xxiv, 38.
Why do thoughts arise in your hearts ? i. c. Why are they there ? Matt. xxiv. 24. There
shall arise false Christ s, i. c. there shall actually be at that time such persons according to
my piedictiou. So, to be found is among the Hebrews of the same import with the above^
mentioned expressions, and accordingly in the Old Testament one is put for the other, as in
1 Sam. xxv. 28. Evil hath not been found in thce. 2 Chron. six. 3. Good things are found
i)i thco* Isa, li. 0. Joy and gladness shall ba found therein' Dan. v. 12. An excellent
spirit was found in Daniel. In these and other texts the Hebrew word rendered/ou/zcf is
equivalent to was. In imitation of this Hebraism, to be found is used for sum or existo,
to be, iu the New Testament, as in Luke xvii. IS, There are not found that returned to
give glory to God, saw this stranger. Acts v. 39. Lest haply ye bo found to Jtght against
God. 1 Cor. iv. 2. That a man be found faitJiful. Phil. ii. 8. Being found in fashion
as a man, Hob. xi. .5. JSmch was not found .- which is the same with Enoch was not, as
is evident from comparing this place with Gen. v, 24, to which it refers. The expression
of St. Peter, 1 Ep. ii, '22, Ntilhcr wax git Me found in his mouth, is taken from Isa. liii. 9.
Neither was there any deceit (or guile) in, his mouth. Whence it appears, that in this, as
well as the other texts above cited, to be found is equivalent to was.
1 Lcusden de Dlulcctis, p. 20. Michaclis, vol. i. p. 123.
'- In his Philologia Sacra : this work was originally published in 4to. but the best edi-
tion is that of M. Fischer, In 8vo, Leipstc, 1778. Vorstius's treatise was abridged by
Lcusden in his Philolugus Gracus; and Lcusdeu's Abridgment was republished by
Fitti'lier, with valuable noloH and other additions, in 8vo. Leipsic, 1783.
3 In his Hcrmuncutica Sacra Novi UYstamenti, parsii. vol. ii. pp. 1 G2.
4 See particularly pp. l J7:i 2i)(\ 304307. and 333352. Sue also Schaefer's In-
stitutionoK fc)cri])turistit'(c, parsii, pp. 194 ^05,
6 Michaclis, vol. i. pp. 1*25. Glossitis has given several instances in his Philologia
Sacra, canons xxviii. and xxix. vol. i, pp. 67 72, edit Dathc. Professor Winer divides
the Hebraisms of the Now Testament into two classes, perfect and imperfect. Greek
Grammar of the New Test, pp. r>2 35. wlieru he haw given many iwpoitant examples.
C *
24 On ike Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
2. Verbs expressive of a person's doing an action, are often used to sig-
nify his supposing the thing, or discovering and acknowledging the fact, or
his declaring and foretelling the event, especially in the prophetic writings.
Thus, He thatjindeth his life shall lose it (Matt. x.39.), means, He that expects to save his
life by apostaci/, shall lose it. So, Let him become a fool (1 Cor. iii. 18.), is equivalent to,
Let him become sensible of his folly. Make the heart of this people fat ( Jsa. VT. 9, 10.), i- o.
Prophesy that they shall be so. What God hath cleansed (Acts x. 15.)> i. e. What God haih
declared clean. J3ut of that day and hour no man knoweth (that is, makcth known), not
even the angels who are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father (Matt. xxiv. S6,) 5 that is s
neither man, nor an angel, nor the Son, has permission to make known this secret*
3. Negative verbs are often put for a strong positive affirmation.
Thus, No good thing will he withhold (Psal. Ixxxiv. 11.), means, Hewitt give them all good
things __ Being not weak in the faith (Rom. iv. 19.), i.e. Being strong in the faith. I
will not leave you comfortless (John xiv, IS.), means, / will loth protect and give you the
most solid conifirt.
4. The privileges of the first-born among the Jews being very great,
that which is chief or most eminent in any kind, is called the first-born,
Gen. xlix. 3.
So, in Job xviii. 13., the first-born of death is the most fatal and cruel death. In
Isa. xiv- 30. the first-born of the poor denotes those who are most poor and miserable. (Sec
also Psai. Ixxxix. 27. Jer. xxxi. 9. Rom, viii. 29. Col. i. 15. 18. Hob. xii. 23.)
5. The word son has various peculiar significations. This word was a
favourite one among the Hebrews, who employed it to designate a great
variety of relations. The son of any thing, according to the oriental idiom,
may be either what is closely connected with it, dependant on it, like it,
the consequence of it, worthy of it, &c.
Thus, die sons or children of Belial, so often spoken of in the Old Testament, are wicked
men, such as are good for nothing, or such as will not be governed, Children of light arc
such as are divinely enlightened, (Lukexvi. 8. Johnxiu 36. Ephes, v. 8. 1 These." v. 5.)
Children of disobedience are disobedient persons. (Ephes. ii. 2.) Children of Hdl
(Matt, xxiii. 15.); of wrath (Ephes. ii, 3.) ; and Son of perdition (John xvii. 12.
2 Thess. ii. 3.) ; are respectively such as are worthy thereof, or obnoxious thereto. A son
of peace (Luke x. 6.) is one that is worthy of it. (See Matt. x. 13.) The children of a
place are the inhabitants of it. (Ezraii.'l. Psal.cxlix. 2. Jer. ii. 16. So the word
daughter is likewise used (2 Kings xix. 21, P&al, xlv. 12, cxxxvii. S. Lam. ii. 13,
Zech. ii. 10.) ; the city being as a mother, and the inhabitants of it taken collectively, as her
daughter. The children of the promise, are such as embrace and believe the promise of the
Gospel. (GaL iv. 28.) Sons of men (Psal. iv. 2.) are no more than men. And Christ
is as often called the son of man, as he is man. The sons of God (Gen. vi. 2.) are those
xvho professed to be pious, or the children of God. i (Matt. v. 45.) They are such as
imitate him, or are governed by him. (1 John iii. 10.) On the same account are men
called the children, of the devil. So likewise (John viii. 44.) futher is understood in a like
sense ; also those who are the inventors of any thing, or instruct others therein, arc called
their fathers. (Gen. iv. 20.)
6. Name is frequently used as synonymous with persons.
Thus, to believe on the name of Christ (John i. 12.) means to believe on him, See
similar examples in John iii. 18. xx. 31. Rev. iii. 4. In like manner soul is put for
person, in Matt, xii, IS. In whom my soul is well pleased, that is, in whom I am well
pleased. See other examples in Gen. xii. 13. six. 20. Psal. cvi. 15, Job xvi. 4. Brov.
xxv. 25. Rom. xiii. 1. Heb. x. 38.
7. As the Jews had but few adjectives in their language, they liad re-
course to substantives, in order to supply their place.
Hence we find kingdom and glory used to denote a glorious tingdom. (1 Thess. ii. 12.)
Mouth and wisdom for wise discourse (Luke xxi. 15.) : the patience of hope for patient
expectotwn (1 Thess. i. 3.) ; glory of his power for glorious power. (2 Thess. i, 9.) So cir-
* * ^7^ t&to**?* of the words Son," and Sons of God," according to
the oriental idioms, are investigated and elucidated at considerable length by Professor
I. Sect. IL] Hebraisms of the New Testament* 25
cumcision and uncircumcision mean circumcised and uncircumcised persons. Anathema
(1 Cor. xvi, 22.) means, an excommunicated member. The spirits of the prophets (1 Cor.
xiv. 32.), means, the spiritual gifts of the prophets. When one substantive governs another, in
the genitive, one of them is sometimes used as an adjective. In the body of his flesh, means,
m his fleshly lady (Col. i 22.) ; JBond of pcrfictness (Col.iii. 14.), means, & perfect band.
In Eph. vi. 12. spiritual wickedness, means, wicked spirits. Newness of life (Rom. vii. 6.),
is a ueio life. The tree of the knowledge of goodajid evil (Gen. ii. 9. compared with iii. 22.),
means, the tree of the knowledge of good, or of a pleasure which to taste is an evil. When two
substantives are joined together, by the copulative and, the one frequently governs the other,
as in Dan* iii. 7. All the people, the ?iatio)is, and the languages, mean, people of all nations
and languages. In Acts xxiii. 6. the hope and resurrection of the dead, means, the hope of
the resurrection of the dead. In Col. ii. 8. Philosophy and vain deceit, denotes, a false and
deceitful philosophy. Hath brought life and immortality to light (2 Tim. i. 10.), means, to
Iring immortal life to light. But the expression, I am the ivay, the truth, and the life,
(John xiv. 6.) means, I am the true and living way. It is of importance to observe, that,
in the original, nouns in the genitive case sometimes express the object, and sometimes the
agent. In Matt. ix. 35, the gospel of the kingdom, means, good news concerning the king-
dam. Doctrines of devils, (1 Tim. iv. I.) evidently mean, doctrines concerning demons*
The faith of Christ often denotes the faith which the Lord Jesus Christ enjoins. The
righteousness of God sometimes means, his personal perfection, and sometimes that righte-
ousness which he requires of his people. In Col. ii. 11. the circumcision of Christ, means,
the circumcision enjoined by Christ, The Hebrews used the word hving, to express the ex-
cellence of the thing to which it is applied. Thus, living walcr, or living fountain, signifies,
running, or excellent water. Living stones, living way, living oracles, mean, excellent stones,
an excellent way, and excellent oracles.
8. The Jews, having no superlatives in their language, employed the
words of God or of the Lord, in order to denote the greatness or excel-
lency of a thing.
Thus, in Gen. xiii.10., a beautiful garden is called the garden of the Lord. In 1 Sam.
xxvi. 113. a very deep sleep is called the strep of the Lord. In 2 Chron. xiv. 14. andxvii. 10.,
the fiur of the Lord denotes a very great fear. In Psal. xxxvi. 7. Hob. (6. of English
Bibles), the mountains of God are exceeding high mountains; and in Psal. Ixxx. 10. (Hub.)
tl\Q tallest cedars arc termed cedars of God. The voices of God (Exod. ix 28, Heb. in our
version properly rendered mighty t/mttdcrings) mean superlatively, loud thunder. Compare
also the sublime description of the effects of thunder, or the voice of God, in Psal.xxix.3 "8.
The production of rain by the electric spark" is alluded to, in a very beautiful manner, in
Jer. x. 13. When, he (God) uttereth his voice, there is a multitude of waters in the heavens. 1
In Jonah iii. 2. Nineveh is termed an exceeding great citys which in the original Hebrew is
a city great to God. The like mode of expression occurs in the New Testament. Thus,
In Acts vii. 20. Moses is said to be affrsios TW ecu, literally fair to God, or, as it is correctly
rendered in our version, exceeding fair. And in 2 Cor. x. 4. the weapons of our warfare
are termed Suj/ara rco 0ew, literally, mi^At// to Gud, that is, exceeding powerful) not mighty
through Cod, as in our authorised translation.
9- According to the Hebrew idiom, a sword has a mouth 9 or the edge of
the sword is called a mouth. (Luke xxi. 24-.)
They shall fall by the mouth (or, as our translators have correctly rendered it> the edge)
of the sword (Hd*. xi, 54-1 escaped the edge of the sword, is in the Greek <rro/ia, the nwulk
of the sword. So, we read of a twQ-moitlhed sword (ITeb, iv. 12.), for it is Sttrrojuosin the
Greek. That this is the Hebrew phraseology may be seen by comparing Judg. iii, 1 G.
Paul, cxlix. G* Prov. v, 4.
10. The verb yiituo-KO) to Jotu, in the New Testament, frequently de-
notes to approve*
Thus, in Matt vii, 23. 1 never knew you, means, I never approved you. A similar
construction occurs in I Cor. viii. 3, and in Horn, vii, 15. (Gr.) which in our version is
rendered allow. Compare also Psal, i, C.
11. Lastly, to hear denotes to understand) to attend to 9 and to regard
what is said.
In illustration of this remark, compare Deut. xviii, 15. with Acts iii. 23. and see also
Matt, xvii 4 5. and xi. 15. xiii. 9. and Luke viii. 8.
It were no difficult task to adduce numerous similar examples of
Dr, A. Clarke on Exod. ix. 28.
26 On the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
the Hebraisms occurring in the Scriptures, and particularly in the
New Testament; but the preceding may suffice to show the benefit
that may be derived from duly considering the import of a word in
the several passages of holy writ in which it occurs.
In order to understand the full force and meaning of the Hebraisms
of the New Testament, the following canons have been laid down by
the celebrated critic John Augustus Ernesti, and his annotator Pro-
fessor Morus,
1. Compare Hebrew tuords and farms of expressions luith those "which
occur in good Greek formula > particularly in doctrinal passages.
As all languages have some modes of speech which are common to each other, it some-
times happens that the same word or expression is both Hebrew, and good Greek, and
affords a proper meaning, whether we take it in a Hebrew or a Greek sense. But, in such
cases, it is preferable to adopt that meaning which a Jew would give, because it is most
probable that the sacred writer had this in view rather than the Greek meaning, especially
if the latter were not of very frequent occurrence. Thus, the expression, ye shall die in your
sins (John viii. 24.), if explained according to the Greek idiom, is equivalent to ye shall
persevere in a course of sinful pmcl ice to the end of your Hues ; but, according to the Hebrew
idiom, it not only denotes a physical or temporal death, but also eternal death, and is equi-
valent to ye shall be damned on account of your sins, in rejecting the Messiah. The latter
interpretation, therefore, is preferably to be adopted, as agreeing best with the Hebrew mode
of thinking, and also with the context.
This rule applies particularly to the doctrinal passages of the New Testament, which must
in all cases be interpreted according to the genius of the Hebrew language. Thus, to fear
Gad, in the language of a Je\v, means to reverence or worship God generally. The know*
ledge of Gad, which is so frequently mentioned in the New Testament, if taken accordinn-
to the Hebrew idiom, implies not only the mental knowledge of God, but also the worship
and reverence of Him which flows from it, and, consequently, it is both a theoretical and a
practical knowledge of God. The reason of this rule is obvious. In the first place, our
Saviour and his apo&tles, the first teachers of Christianity, were Jews, who had been edu-
cated in the Jewish religion and language ; and who (with the exception of Paul) being
unacquainted with the niceties of the Greek language at the time they were called to the
apostolic office, could only express them&elves in tlie style and manner peculiar to their
country. Secondly, the religion taught in the New Testament agrees with that delivered
in the Old Testament, of which it is a continuation,- so that the ritual worship enjoined by
the law of Moses is succeeded by a spiritual or internal worship ; the leo-al dispensation is
succeeded by the Gospel dispensation, in which what was imperfect and obscure is become
perfect and clear. Now things that are continued are substantially the same, or of a similar
nature. Thus the expression to come unto God occurs both in the Old and in the New Tes-
tament. In the former it simply means to go up to the temple,- in the latter it is continued,
so that what was' imperfect becomes perfect, and it implies the mental or spiritual approach
unto the Most Bisk i. e. the spiritual worshipping of God, In like manner, since the nu-
merous particulars related in the Old Testament concerning the victims, priests, and temple
of God are transferred, in the New Testament, to the atoning death of Christ, to his ofFerinjr
of himself to death, and to the Chii&tian church, the veil of figure being withdrawn the force
and beauty of these expressions cannot be perceived, nor their meaning fully ascertained un
less we interpret the doctrinal rarts of the New Testament, by the aid of the Old Testament.
2. The Hebraisms of the Neto Testament are to be compared tuith the
good Greek occurring in the Septuagint or Alexandrian version*
As the Hebraisms occurring in the Old Testament are uniformly rendered, in the
Septuagint version, in good Greek, this translation may be considered as a commentary
and exposition of those passages, and as conveying the sense of the Hebrew nation con
cernmg their meaning; The Alexandrian translation, therefore, ought to be consulted in
toe passages of the New Testament in which the sacred writers have rendered the He-
braisms literally. Thus in 1 Cor. xv. 54. death is said to be wallowed p in victory
sentence is a quotation from Isaiah xxv. 8. As the Hebrew word n Zena^i
'
. . s e erew wor n enaihn
S?*Sl TT S tl?e fore ' e of an adve , rb ' and mcans >* > M * " *2 J*
and as the Septuagint sometimes renders the word LCWCTMCH by s mo* in victory but
mpst commonly by <* *>, for ever, Michaelis is of opinion that this last meaning pZjeHy
bG Mdfired ^ iS """
I. Sect. II.] Rabbinisms, $c. of the New Testament, 27
3. In passages that are good Greek, which are common loth to the Old
and New Testament, the corresponding words in the Hebrew Old Testament
are to be compared.
Several passages occur In the New Testament, that are good Greek, and which arc also
to be found in the Alexandrian version. In these cases it is not sufficient to consult the
Greek language only : recourse should also be had to the Hebrexv, because such words of
the Septuagiut and New Testament have acquired a different meaning from what is given to
them by Greek writers, and are sometimes to be taken in a more lax, sometimes in a
more strict sense. Thus, in Gen.v. 24. and Heb. xi, 5. it is said that Enoch pleased God
evTipeffTViKevai T<a 0:w; which expression in itself is sufficiently clear, and is also good
Greek ; but if we compare the corresponding expression in the Hebrew, its true meaning
Is, thatke walked with God. In rendering this clause by eirtjpeerrfj/cEpat TV 0eat?, the Greek
translator did not render the Hebrew verbatim, for in that case he would have said 7repje7raT7j<re
<TVV e ; but he translated it correctly as to the sense. Enoch pleased God, because he lived
habitually as in the sight of God, setting him always before his eyes in every thing he said,
thought, and did. In Psal. ii. 1. the Septuagint version runs thus, Ivan e$pvaw &wi
-why did the nations rags ? Now though this expression is good Greek, it does not fully
render the original Hebrew, which means, why do the, nations furiously and tumnltuoitsly
assemble together, or rebel ? The Septuagint therefore is not sufficiently close. Once more,
the expression owe oyrey, they are not, is good Greek, but admits of various meanings, indi-
cating those who are not yet in existence, those who are already deceased, or, figuratively,
persons of no authority. * This expression occurs both in the Septuagint version of Jer.
xxxi. 15. and also in Mattii. IS. If we compare the original Hebrew, we shall find that
it is to be limited to those who are dead. Hence it nill be evident that the collation of the
original Hebrew will not only prevent us from taking words either in too lax or too strict
a sense, but will also guard us against uncertainty as to their meaning, and lead us to that
very sense which the sacred writer intended.
Besides the Hebraisms, which we have just considered, there are
found in the New Testament various Rabbinical, Syriac, Persic,
Latin, and other idioms and words, which are respectively denomi-
nated Rabbinisins, Syriasms, Persisms, Latinisms, &c. &c. on which
it may not be improper to offer a few remarks.
1. Rabbinisms* We have already seen that during, and subse-
quent to, the Babylonian captivity, the Jewish language sustained
very considerable changes. 1 New words, new sentences, and new
expressions were introduced, especially terms of science, which Moses
or Isaiah would have as little understood, as Cicero or Caesar would
a system of philosophy or theology composed in the language of the
schools. This New flebrew language is called Talmudical, or Rab-
binical, from the writings in which it is used ; and, although these
writings are of much later date than the New Testament, yet, from
the coincidence of expressions, it is not improbable that, even in the
time of Christ, this was the learned language of the Rabbins. 2
Lightfoot, Schoetgeniusj Meuschen, and others, have excellently
illustrated the Rabbinisms occurring in the New* Testament.
2. Aramaisms, or Syriasms and Chaldaisms. The vernacular lan-
guage of the Jews, in the time of Jesus Christ, was the Aramaean ;
which branched into two dialects, differing in pronunciation rather than
in words, and respectively denominated the Chaldee or East Ara-
maean, and the Syriac> or West Aramaean. The East Aramaean
was spoken at Jerusalem and in Judaea ; and was used by Christ
1 Sec p. 5. supra*
2 Michaelis, vol. i. p. 129., who has given some illustrative examples. Mori Acroases
super Hermeneuticae Novi Testament!, vol. i. p, 23S. See also OSearius de Stylo Novi
Testament*, membr. in. aphorism vii. (Thesaurus Theologu-us Nov. Test. torn. Ii.
pp. 23, 24.)
28 Chi the Original Languages of Scripture. [Part I. Ch.
in his familiar discourses and conversations with the Jews ; the West
Aramaean was spoken in " Galilee of the Gentles." It was there-
fore natural that numerous Chaldee and Syriac words, phrases, and
terms of expressions should be intermixed with the Greek of the
New Testament, and even such as are not to be found in the Sep-
tuagint : and the existence of these Chaldaisms and Syriasms, af-
fords a strong intrinsic proof of the genuineness and authenticity of
the New Testament. Were this, indeed, " free from these idioms,
we might naturally conclude that it was not written either by men
of Galilee or Judaea, and therefore was spurious ; for, as certainly
as the speech of Peter betrayed him to be a Galiloean, when Christ
stood before the Jewish tribunal, so certainly must the written lan-
guage of a man, born 3 educated, and grown old in Galilee, discover
marks of his native idiom, unless we assume the absurd hypothesis,
that God hath interposed a miracle, which would have deprived the
New Testament of one of its strongest proofs of authenticity." 1
The following are the principal Aramaean or Syriac and Chaldee
words occurring in the New Testament: A$3a (Abba), Father,
(Rom. viii. 15.) AxsXSa^a (Aceldama), the field of blood, (Acts i. 19.)
- AftAye&8y (Armageddon), the mountain of Megiddo, or of the Gospel,
(Rev. xvi. 16.) Bij&ea-Sa (Bethesda\ the house of mercy, (John v.2.)
K^a; (Cephas), a rock or stone, (John i. 4-3.) KopjSav ( Corban), a gift
or offering dedicated to God, (Mark vii. 11.) EXi, EXa*, Xa/Aa erapa%8*vi
(Eloiy Eloi, lama sabacJitkani), my God, my God! why hast thou forsaken
me ? (Matt, xxvii. 46. Mark xv. 34?.) TL$$aQa (Ephphaiha), be thou
opened, (Mark vii. 34.) Malaya (Mammon), riches, (Matt. vi. 24.)
Ma;av A0 (Maran Atha), the Lord cometh, (1 Cor. xvi. 22.) Pax
(Raca), thou worthless fellow ! (Matt. v. 22. ) Ta?.*0 V.WIM (Talitha cumi),
maid arise ! (Mark v. 41.) 2
3. Latinisms. ec The sceptre having departed from Judah,"
(Gen, xlix. 10.) by the reduction of Judaea into a Roman province,
the extension of the Roman laws and government would naturally
follow the success of the Roman arms : and if to these we add the
imposition of tribute by the conquerors, together with the commer-
cial intercourse necessarily consequent on the political relations of the
Jews with Rome 9 we shall be enabled readily to account for the Latin-
isms, or Latin words and phrases, that occur in the New Testament.
The following is a li$t of the principal Latimsms : Atrcrapiov (assarion,
from the Latin word assarius), equivalent to about three quarters of a
farthing of our money, (Matt. x. 29- Luke xii. 6.) Kijwrof (census), as-
1 Michaelis, vol. i. p. 135. Morus, vol. i. p. 237. Arigler, Hermeneuticce Biblica,
pp. 8388. Bishop Marsh, in his notes to Michaelis, states, that a new branch of the
Aramaean language has been discovered by Professor Adler, which differs in some respects
from the East and West Aramsan dialects. For an account of it, he refers to the third
part of 21. Adler's Nwi Testamenti Versiones Syriacte, Simplex, Phttoxeniana, et HWTO&Q- ,
tymilana, denuo examinaleu, <Jc. 4to. Hafnias, 1789, of which work we have not been able
to obtain a sight. PfeifFer has an amusing disquisition on the Galilaean dialect of Peter,
which in substance corresponds with the above-cited remark of Michaelis, though Pfeiffer
does not seem, to have known the exact names of the dialects then in use among the Jews.
Op. tom^i. pp, 616 622.
* ^Additional examples of Chaldaisms and Syriasms may be seen in Olearius de Stylo
Novi Tesitanifinti, membr. iii, aphorism vi, (Thesaurus Theologico-Philologicus, torn. ii.
pp, 22, 23.)
I. Sect, IL] Latinisms of the Ne> Testament. 29
sessment or rate, (Matt. xvii. 25.) K&TGvpiav (centurio) } a centurion a
(Mark xv, 39. 44, 45.) K&wia (colonia), a colony, (Acts xvi. 12.)
KovffJ&ha (custodia), a guard of soldiers, (Matt, xxvii. 65, 66. xxviii. 11.)
Aqvaptos (denarius), a Roman penny, equivalent to about seven-pence
halfpenny of our money, (Luke vii. 41.) fcjjoyeUwy (flagellum), a scourge,
(Johnii. 15.); from this word is derived $pavyeM.Qsf, to scourge with whips,
(Matt, xxvii. 26. Mark xv. 15.) As this was a Roman punishment, it is
no wonder that we find it expressed by a term nearly Roman. lova-7o$
(Justus), (Acts i. 23.) Aey^? (legio), a legion, (Matt, xxvi, 53.)
Kt&pxyrrtf (quadrans) a Roman coin equivalent to about three fourths of
an English halfpenny, (Matt. v. 26.) A^srm? (libertinus), a freed man,
(Acts vi. 9.) AirsaT (lil)ra) 9 a pound, (John xii. 3.) AWTM (linteitm),
a towel, (John xiii. 4.) Max.sXAoy (macellum), shambles, (1 Cor. x. 25.)
Mepppxya, (membrana), parchment, (2 Tim. iv. 13.) Mfrtw (mi lie), a mile;
the Roman mile consisting of a thousand paces, (Matt. v. 41.) Henrys
(sextarins), a kind of pot, (Mark vii. 4.8.) npeuTopw (pr&torium), a
judgment-hall, or place where the praetor or other chief magistrate
heard and determined causes, (Matt, xxvii. 27.) 2^,a;x*vSry or 2^x*j/&*fi>
(semicinctium), an apron, (Acts xix. 12.) Smapus (sicarius), an assassin,
(Acts xxi. 38.) I,Qv$i*pt6v (sudarium), a napkin, or handkerchief, (Luke
xix. 20.) 2iKxowXaTfi?p (speculator), a soldier employed as an executioner^
(Mark vi. 27.) Tagepva (taberna), a tavern, (Acts xxviii. 15.) T^rAoj
(titulus), a title, (John xix. 19, 20.) *
4. From the unavoidable intercourse of the Jews with the neigh-
bouring nations, the Arabs, Persians (to whose sovereigns they
were formerly subject), and the inhabitants of Asia Minor, numerous
words, and occasional expressions may be traced in the New Tes-
tament, which have been thus necessarily introduced among the
Jews. These words, however, are not sufficiently numerous to
constitute so many entire dialects : for instance, there are not more
than four or five Persian words in the whole of the New Testament,
These cannot, therefore, be in strictness termed Persisms; and,
though the profoundly learned Michaelis is of opinion that the
Zend-avesta, or antient book of the Zoroastrian religion, translated
by M. Anquetil clu Perron, throws considerable light on the phrase-
ology of Saint John's writings ; yet, as the authenticity of that work
has been disproved by eminent orientalists, it cannot (we apprehend)
be with propriety applied to the elucidation of the New Testament.
From the number of words used by Saint Paul in peculiar senses,
as well as words not ordinarily occurring in Greek writers, Mi-
chaelis is of opinion (after Jerome) that they were provincial idioms
used in Cilicia in the age in which he lived ; and hence he deno-
minates them Cilicisms* 2
The preceding considerations and examples may suffice to convey
1 Pritii Introductio ad Lectionem Novi Testament!, pp. 320 322. Olearius, sect. 2.
memb.iii. aph, ix. pp. 24, 25. Arigler, Hermeneutica Biblica, p. 99. Michaelis, vei.L
pp. ] 62 173. Morus, vol. i. pp.235, 235. Oiearius and Michaelis have collected
numerous instances of Latinising phrases occurring in the New Testament, which want of
room compels us to omit. Full elucidations of the various idioms above cited are <viven
by Schleusner and Parkhurst in their Lexicons to the New Testament. The Greeco-
Barbara Novi Testament! (I6mo. Amsterdam, 1649,) of Cheitoraseus, may also be con-
sulted when it can be met with.
* Michaelis, vol. i. pp, 149162,
30 On the Cognate or Kindred Languages. [Part I. Ch.
some idea of the genius of the Greek language of the New Testa-
ment. For an account of the principal editions of the Greek Tes-
tament, see the Appendix to this Volume, pp. 10 27.; and for the
most useful Lexicons that can be consulted, see pp. 168 172.
SECTION III.
ON THE COGNATE OR KINDRED LANGUAGES.
1. The Aramcean, with its two dialects ; 1. The Chaldee ; 2. The Synac.
II. The Arabic, with its derivative, the Ethiopia. III. Use and
importance of the Cognate Languages to Sacred Criticism.
1 HE Cognate or Kindred Languages are those which are allied to
the Hebrew, as being sister-dialects of the Shemitish languages, all
of which preserve nearly the same structure and analogy. The prin-
cipal cognate languages are the Aramaean, and the Arabic, with their
respective dialects or derivatives.
1. The ARAMAEAN LANGUAGE (which in the authorised English
version of 2 Kings xviii. 26., and Dan. ii. 4., is rendered the Syrian
or Syriack] derives its name from the very extensive region of Aram a in
which it was antiently vernacular. As that region extended from the
Mediterranean sea through Syria and Mesopotamia, beyond the river
Tigris, the language there spoken necessarily diverged into various
dialects ; the two principal of which are the Chaldee and the Syriac.
J. The Chaldee, but more correctly, the Babylonian, Assyrian, or
Eastern Aramaean dialect was formerly spoken in Babylonia and
Assyria, and was the vernacular dialect spoken in Judaea after the
captivity of the Hebrews. Besides the portions of the Old Testa-
ment already stated in page 3, as being written in this tongue,
numerous Chaldaic words occur in the book of Job, the Proverbs,
and other parts of the sacred writings, for the correct understanding
of which the knowledge of Chaldee is necessary. It is further o^
great use for enabling us to read the Chaldee paraphrases which
show the sense put by the Jews themselves on the words of Scripture. 1
2. The Syriac or Western Aramcean was spoken both in Syria
and Mesopotamia ; and, after the captivity, it became vernacular in
Galilee. Hence, though several of the sacred writers of the New
Testament expressed themselves in Greek, their ideas were Syriac ;
and they consequently used many Syriac idioms, and a few Syriac
words, 2 The chief difference between the Syriac and Chaldee con-
sists in the vowel-points or mode of pronunciation ; and, notwith-
standing the forms of their respective letters are very dissimilar, yet
the correspondence between the two dialects is so close, that if the
Chaldee be written in Syriac characters without points it becomes
Syriac, with the exception of a single inflexion in the formation of
i Jahn, Elements Aramaic Linguae, p. 2. Walton's Prolegomena, c. xii. $23
(pp. 559562. edit. Dathii,) 5 '
a Masclef, Gramiu, Hebr. vol. ii. p, 114. Wotton's Misna, voU. prsef. p. xviii.
I. Sect. III.] On the Cognate or Kindred Languages. 31
the verbs* l The great assistance, which a knowledge of this dialect
affords to the critical understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures, is il-
lustrated at considerable length by the elder Michaelis, in a philolo-
gical dissertation, originally published in 1756, and reprinted in the
first volume of MM. Pott's and Ruperti's " Sylloge Commenta-
tionum Theologicarum." G
II. Though more remotely allied to the Hebrew than either of
the preceding dialects, the ARABIC LANGUAGE possesses sufficient
analogy to explain and illustrate the former, and is not, perhaps, in-
ferior in importance to the Chaldee or the Syriac ; particularly as it
is a living language, in which almost every subject has been discussed,
and has received the minutest investigation from native writers and
lexicographers. The Arabic language has many roots in common
with the Hebrew tongue ; and this again contains very many words
which are no longer to be found in the Hebrew writings that are
extant, but which exist in the Arabic language. The learned Jews
who flourished in Spain from the tenth to the twelfth century under
the dominion^ of the Moors, were the first who applied Arabic to the
illustration of the Hebrew language: and subsequent Christian wri-
ters, as Bochart, the elder Schultens, Olaus Celsius, and others, have
diligently and successfully applied the Arabian historians, geographers.,
and authors on natural history, to the explanation of the Bible. 3
The Ethiopia language, which is immediately derived from the
Arabic, has been applied with great advantage to the illustration of
the Scriptures by Bocharf, De Dieu, Hottinger, and Ludolph (to
whom we are indebted for an Ethiopic Grammar and Lexicon) * J :
and Pfeiffer has explained a few passages in the books of Ezra and
Daniel, ^by the aid of the Persian language. 5
III. The Cognate or Kindred Languages are of considerable use
in sacred criticism. They may lead us to discover the occasions of
such false readings as transcribers unskilled in the Hebrew, but ac-
customed to some of the other dialects, have made by writino- words
in the form of that dialect instead of the Hebrew form, Further,
the knowledge of these languages will frequently serve to prevent ilk
grounded conjectures that a passage is corrupted, by showing that
the common reading is susceptible of the very sense which such pas-
sage requires : and when different readings are ibitnd in copies of
the Bible, these languages may sometimes assist us in determining
which of them ought to be preferred/'
1 Walton, Prol. c. xiii. 2, 3, 4, 5. (pp. 5.9-1 C03.)
* D. Chnstiani Benedict! Michaclis Dissortatio JPhHolotfca, nn Lamina y
illuirtrando Ebraismo Sa.ro exibentur (Hal*, 175C), in SWa and Ilupt'rti'J
havu !MBrtBd in the notos somc additioL
v r, k '. i >rol. e,sir. 2^7. 14, (pp.
, ' Blsh P Marsh's Divinity Lectures, partiii. p. 28.
t 5 a V? r> T? Ienn ' SaCT ' P ' 107 ' Walton > Pro1 ' c " xvi ' <*-* (PP- 674678.)
SO ^ tt J Ma ^ ccn *' iv v no -^; (Op. torn. i. pp, 4SO-4SS. ) and Herm, Sacra, c. vi.
' >' bld ' 1 f? i "' I)( e48 ') Walton, Prol, c. xvi. 5. (pp. 6'91, 6930
Gerard s Institutes of Biblical Criticism, p. 63, For Bibliographical Notices of the
me 'T73 arS 17S CO " S f th C%riUltC Lai ^ ua ^ cs ' soe thc A W iflodixtptliw
32 On the Antient Versions of the Scriptures. [Part I.
CHAPTER II.
ON THE ANTIENT VERSIONS OF THE SCRIPTURES.
NEXT to the kindred languages, versions afford the greatest as-
sistance to the criticism and interpretation of the Scriptures. " It is
only by means of versions, that they, who are ignorant of the original
languages, can at all learn what the Scripture contains : and every
version, so far as it is just, conveys the sense of Scripture to those
who understand the language in which it is written/'
Versions may be divided into two classes, antient and modern : the
former were made immediately from the original languages by per-
sons to whom they were familiar ; and who, it may be reasonably
supposed, had better opportunities for ascertaining the force and
meaning of words, than more recent translators can possibly have.
Modern versions are those made in later times* and chiefly since the
reformation : they are useful for explaining the sense of the- inspired
writers, while antient versions are of the utmost importance both for
the criticism and interpretation of the Scriptures. The present
chapter will, therefore, be appropriated to giving an account of those
which are most esteemed for their antiquity and excellence* l
The principal antient versions, which illustrate the Scriptures, are
the Chaldee Paraphrases, generally called Targums s the Septuagint,
or Alexandrian Greek version, the translations of Aquila, ' Symma-
chus, and Theodotion, and what are called the fifth, sixth, and
seventh versions, (of which latter translations fragments only are
extant,) together with the Syriac, and Latin or Vulgate versions.
Although the authors of these versions did not flourish at the time
when the Hebrew language was spoken, yet they enjoyed many ad-
vantages for understanding the Bible, especially the Old Testament,
which are not possessed by the moderns : for, living near the time
when that language was vernacular, they could learn by tradition
the true signification of some Hebrew words, which is now forgotten.
Many of them also being Jews, and from their childhood accustomed
to hear the rabbins explain the Scripture, the study of which they
diligently cultivated, and likewise speaking a dialect allied to the
Hebrew, they could not but become well acquainted with the latter,
Hence it may be safely inferred that the antient versions generally
give the true sense of Scripture, and not nnfrequently in passages
where it could scarcely be discovered by any other means. All the
antient versions, indeed, are of great importance both in the criticism,
as well as in the interpretation, of the sacred writings, but they are
not all witnesses of equal value ; for the authority of the different
versions depends partly on the age and country of their respective
authors, partly on the text whence their translations were made, and
partly on the ability and fidelity with which they were execute^ It
will therefore be not irrelevant to offer a short historical notice of
1 Tor an account of the principal modern versions, the reader is referred to the Ap-
pendix, pp, 53113. . * f
Ch. II. Sect. L] Of the Targums, or Ckaldee Paraphrases. 23
the principal versions above mentioned, as well as of some other au-
tient versions of less celebrity perhaps, but which have been bene-
ficially consulted by biblical critics.
SECTION I.
ON THE TARGUJVIS, OR CHALDEE PARAPHRASES OF THE OLD
TESTAMENT.
I. Targum of Onltelos ; II. Of the Pseudo- Jonathan ; III. The Jeru-
salem Targum; IV. The Targum of Jonathan Ben Uzziel ; V. The
Targum on the Hagiographa ; VI. The Targum on the Megilloth ;
VII, VIII, IX. Three Targums on the Book of Esther ; X. A
Targum on the Books of Chronicles ; XL Real value of the different
Targums.
1 HE Chaldee word DI^Hn TARGUM signifies, in general, any
version or explanation ; but this appellation is more particularly
restricted to the versions or paraphrases of the Old Testament, exe-
cuted in the East-Aramaean or Chaldee dialect, as it is usually called.
These Targums are termed paraphrases or expositions, because they
are rather comments and explications, than literal translations of the
text : they are written in the Chaldee tongue, which became familiar
to the Jews after the time of their captivity in Babylon a and was
more known to them than the Hebrew itself: so that, when the law
was " read in the synagogue every Sabbath day," in pure biblical
Hebrew, an explanation was subjoined to it in Chaldee ; in order to
render it intelligible to the people, who had but an imperfect know-
ledge of the Hebrew language. This practice, as already observed,
originated with Ezra T ; as there are no traces of any written Tar-
gums prior to those of Onkelos and Jonathan, who are supposed to
have lived about the time of our Saviour, it is highly probably that
these paraphrases were at first merely oral ; that, subsequently, the
ordinary glosses on the more difficult passages were committed to
writing"; and that, as the Jews were bound by an ordinance of their
elders to possess a copy of the law, these glosses were either after-
wards collected together and deficiencies in them supplied, or new
and connected paraphrases were formed.
There are at present extant ten paraphrases on different parts of
the Old Testament, three of which comprise the Pentateuch, or five
books of Moses: !. The Targum of Onkelos; 2. That falsely
ascribed to Jonathan, and usually cited as the Targum of the Pseudo-
1 See pp. 5, 6> supra. Our account of the Chaldee paraphrases is drawn up From a
careful consideration of what has been written on them, by Carpzov, in his Oitwa
Sacra, part ii. c. i. pp. 430 481. ; Bishop Walton, Prol. c. 12. sectiu pp. 568^92. ;
Leusdcn, in Philolog. Hebroeo-Mixt. DIKS. v. vi, and vii. pp, 3658. ; Dr, Prideaux,
Connection, part ii, bookviii. sub anno 37. B, c. vol. iii. pp, 531 555. (edit. 1 7 18,)
Kortholt, De variis Scripturse Editionibus, c, iii, pp. 34 51.; PfehTer, Critica Sacra,
cap. via", sect, ii, (Op. torn, ii, pp. 750771.), and in his Treatise de Theologia Judaic*,
&c, Exereit. ii. (Ibid. torn. ii. pp, 862 889.) ; Bauer, Critica Sacra, tract, iii. PP- 288
308.; Rambach. Inst. Herm. Sacrac, pp. 606 6*11. ; Ptctet, Theologie Chretienne,
torn. i. pp. 145. et seq*; Jahn, Introductfo, ad Libros Veteris Fccderis, pp, (>9 75. ; and
"Wsehner's Antiquitates Ebraeoruin, torn, i. pp. 156 170.
VOL, II. D
3$ On the Artfient Versions. [Part I. Ch.
Jonathan; and 3/^The Jerusalem Targurn ; 4. The Targum of Jona-
than Ben TJzziel, (L e. the son of Uzziel) on the Prophets ; 5. The
Targum of Rabbi Joseph the blind, or one-eyed, on the Hagiogra-
pha ^ 6. An anonymous Targum on the five Megilloth, or books of
Ruth, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, and the Lament-
ations of Jeremiah ; 7, 8, 9. Three Targums on the book of Esther;
and, 10. A Targum or paraphrase on the two books of Chronicles*
These Targums, taken together, form a continued paraphrase on
the Old Testament, with the exception of the books of Daniel,, Ezra,
and Nehemiah (antiently reputed to be part of Ezra) ; which being
for the most part written in Chaldee, it has been conjectured that no
paraphrases were written on them, as being unnecessary ; though Dr.
Prideaux is of opinion that Targums were composed on these books
also, which have perished in the lapse of ages.
The language, in which these paraphrases are composed, varies
in purity according to the time when they were respectively written.
Thus, the Targums of Onkelos and the Pseudo- Jonathan ar^nuch
purer than the others, approximating very nearly to the Aramaean
dialect in which some parts of Daniel and Ezra are written, except
indeed that the orthography does not always correspond j while the
language of the later Targums whence the rabbinical dialect derives
its source, is far more impure, "and is intermixed with barbarous and
foreign words. Originally, all the Chaldee paraphrases were written
without vowel-points, like all other oriental manuscripts.: but at
length some persons ventured to add points to them, though very
erroneously, and this irregular punctuation was retained in the Venice
and other early editions of the Hebrew*Bible. Some further imper-
fect attempts towards regular pointing were made both in the Complti-
tensian and in the Antwerp Polyglotts, until at length the elder, BuxtoriJ
in his edition of the Hebrew Bible published at Basil, undertook the
thankless task l of improving the punctuation of the Targnras, accard-
ing to such rules as he had formed from the pointing which he had
found in the Chaldee parts of the books of Daniel and Ezra ; and his
method of punctuation is foljowed in Bfehop Walton's Polyglott
I. The Targum of Onkelos. It is not known, with certainty, at
what time Onkelos flourished, nor of what nation he was : Professor
Eichhorn conjectures that he was a native qf Batof Ion, -first, because
he is mentioned in the Babylonish Talmud ? secondly, because hisf
dialect is not the Chaldee spoken in Palestine, but much purer* and
more closely resembling the style of Daniel and E?ra ; and, .lastly, *
because he has not interwoven any of those fabulous narratws to
which the Jews of Palestine were so much attached, and from which
they could with difficulty refrain, The generally received%pimo.tt
is, that he was a proselyte to Judaism, and a Disciple of thp celebfat<^l
Rabbi Hillel, who flourished about fifty years feefc^e/'we ChHstka *
sera.; and consequently that Onkelos was copl^ipp^Mry with qiuf
1 1% Simon, Hist, Grit, du Vieux Test. liv. ii. c. viii. Wc&ttMdL iftferffc molfc
ofr pointing the Chaldee paraphrases with great severity; observing, that he ^owld
done ntmsli better if he had more diligently examined manuscripts that were ft*br
|*fctiy pointed. ,
II. Sect. L] Targwn of Jertisalem. 35
Saviour : Bauer and Jahn, however, place him in the second cen-
tury. The Targum of Onkelos comprises the Pentateuch or five
books of Moses, and is justly preferred to all the others both by Jews
and Christians, on account of the purity of its style, and its general
freedom from idle legends. It is rather a version than a paraphrase,
and renders the Hebrew text word for word, with so much accuracy
and exactness, that being set to the same musical notes, with the
original Hebrew, it could be read in the same tone as the latter in
the public assemblies of the Jews. And this we find was the prac-
tice of the Jews up to the time of Rabbi Elias Levita ; who flourished
in the early part of the sixteenth century, and expressly states that
the Jews read the law in their synagogues, first in Hebrew and then
in the Targum of Onkelos. This Targum has been translated into
Latin by Alfonso de Zamora, Paulus Fagius, Bernardinus Baldus,
and Andrew de Leon of Zamora. 1
II. The second Targum, which is a more liberal paraphrase of
the Pentateuch than the preceding, is usually called the Targum of
the Pseudo-Jonathan, being ascribed by many to Jonathan Ben Uz-
ziel, who wrote the much-esteemed paraphrase on the Prophets. But
the difference in the style and diction of this Targum, which is very
impure, as well as in the method of paraphrasing adopted in it, clearly
proves that it could not have been written by Jonathan Ben Uzziel,
who indeed sometimes indulges in allegories, and has introduced a
few barbarisms ; but this Targum on the law abounds with the most
idle Jewish legends that can well be conceived ; which, together with
the barbarous and foreign words it contains, render it of very little
utility. From its mentioning. the six parts of the Talmud, (on Exod.
xxvi. 9.) which compilation was not written till two centuries after
the biittoof Christ; Constantinople, (on Numb. xxiv. 19.) which
city wrfS always called Byzantium until it receivedjts name from Con-
stantine the Great, in the beginning of the fourth century ; the Lorn-*
bards, (on Numb. xxiv. 24.) whose first irruption into Italy did not
take place until the year 570 ; and the Turing (on Gen.x. 2.) who did not
become conspicuous till the rfiSddle of the sixth century, learned men
are unanimously of opinion that this Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan
could not have been written before the seventh, or even the eighth cen-
tury. It has been translated into Latin by Anthony Ralph de Cheva-
lier, an eminent French Protestant divine, in the sixteenth century,
III. The Jerusalem Targum,. which also paraphrases the five
books of Moses, derives its name from the dialect in which it is
composed. It is by no mean a connected paraphrase, sometimes
omitting whole verses, or even chapters ; at otEer times explaining
only a single word of a verse, of which it sometimes gives a two-
fold interpretation ; and at others, Hebrew words are inserted with-
out any explanation whatever.. In many respects it corresponds
with the paraphrase of the Pseudo-Jonathan, whose legendary tales
are here frequently repeated, abridged, or expanded. From the
i The fullest information, concerning the Targum of Onkelos, is to be found in the
disquisition of G. B, Winer, entitled Be OnkHoso ejusque Paraphrasi Chatdaica Dis*
sertatio, 4to. Lip^iae, 1820.
D 2
36 On th& Antient Versions. [Part I. Ch.
impurity of its style, and the number of Greek, Latin, and Persian
words which it contains, Bishop Walton 5 Carpzov, Wolfius, and
many other eminent philologers, are of opinion, that it is a com-
pilation by several authors, and consists of extracts and collections.
From these internal evidences, the commencement of the seventh
century has been assigned as its probable date ; but it is more likely
not to have been written before the eighth or perhaps the ninth cen-
tury. This Targum was also translated into Latin by Chevalier and
by Francis Taylor.
IV. The Targum of Jonathan Ben UzzieL According to the
talmudical traditions, the author of this paraphrase was chief of the
eighty distinguished scholars of Rabbi Hillel the elder, and a fellow-
disciple of Simeon the Just, who bore the infant Messiah in his
arms : consequently he would be nearly contemporary with Onkelos.
Wolfius 1 , however, is of opinion that he flourished a short time
before the birth of Christ, and compiled the work which bears his
name a from more antient Targums, that had been preserved 4o his
time by oral tradition. From the silence of Origen and Jerome con-
cerning this Targum, of which they could not but have availed them-
selves if it had really existed in their time, and also from its being
cited in the Talmud, both Bauer and Jahn date it mych later than
is generally admitted : the former, indeed, is of opinion, that its tr\ie
date cannot be ascertained; and the latter, from the inequalities of style
and method observable in it, considers it as a compilation from the
interpretations of several learned men, made about the close of the
third 01* fourth century. This paraphrase treats on the Prophets,
that is (according to the Jewish classification of the sacred .writings),
on the books of Joshua, Judges., 1 & 2 Sam. 1 & 2 Kings, who are
termed the former prophets \ and on Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezejpel, and
the twelve minor prophets, who are designated as the latter pjfphets*
Though the style of this Targum is not so pure and elegant a^ tibaC
of Onkelos, yet it is not disfigured by those legendary tales aiad nu^
xnerous foreign and barbarous words which abound* in the lattef
Targums. Both the language and nqgjNod of interpretation*^ how-
ever, are irregular : in the exposition of the former prophets, the
text is more closely rendered than in that on the Jatter, which is less
accurate, as well as more paraphrastical, anc| inter^ersed with some
traditions and fabulous legends. In order to .attach the greater au- *
thority to the Targum of Jonathan Beji Uzziel, the Jews, not satisfied *
with making him contemporary with the prophets Malachi, Zacha-
riah, and Haggai, and asserting that he received it from theirjips s
have related, that ^hile Jonathan was composing his paraphrase
there was an earthquake for forty leagues around him ; andtfhat |F
any bird happened to pass over hife, or a fly, alighted on his pape^
"while writing, they were immediately consumed by fife from heaven/
without any injury being sustained either by his person l&r his;
of this Targum was translated into Latin by
____^ . ._-
" . dl Bibliotheca Hebraic, torn, i, p. 1 160,
II. Sect. L] Targums on the Cetulim^ Megilloth, and Esther. 37
Zamora, Andrea de Leon, and Conrad Pellican ; and the paraphrase
on the twelve minor prophets, by Iinmanuel Tremellius.
V. The Targum on the Cetubim, Hagiographa, or Ploly Writings,
is ascribed by some Jewish writers to Rqf Jose> or Rabbi Joseph,
sin-named the one-eyed or blind, vv4io is said to have been at the head
of the academy at Sera, in the third century; though others affirm
that its author is unknown. The style is barbarous, impure, and very
unequal, interspersed with numerous digressions and legendary nar-
ratives : on which account the younger Buxtorf, and after him Bauer
and Jahn, are of opinion that the whole is a compilation of later"
times : and this sentiment appears to be the most correct Dr. Pri-
deaux characterises its language as the most corrupt Chaldee of the
Jerusalem dialect. The translators of the preceding Targum,' toge-
ther with Arias Montanus, have given a Latin version of this Tar<mrn.
VI. The Targum on the Megilloth^ or five books of Ecclesiastes,
Song of Songs, Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ruth, and Esther, is evi-
dently a compilation by several persons : the barbarism of its style,
numerous digressions, and idle legends which are inserted, all con-
cur to prove it to be of late date, and certainly not earlier than the
sixth century. The paraphrase on the book of Ruth and the La-
mentations of Jeremiah is the best executed portion : Ecclesiastes is
more freely paraphrased ; but the text of the Song of Solomon is
absolutely lost amidst the diffuse circumscription of its author, and
his djjll glosses and fabulous additions*
VII. VIII. IX. The three Targums antihe looJc of Esther. This
book has always been held in the highest estimation by the Jews ;
which circumstance induced them to translate it repeatedly into the
Chaldee dialect. Three* paraphrases on it have been printed: one
in the Antwerp Polyglotti whicfi is fhuch shorter and* contains fewer
digresBons than the others! another in Bishop Waltori's Polyglott;,
which is more diffuse, and comprises more numerous Jewish fables
and traditions; and a third, of which a Latin Version was published
by Francis Taylor ; and which, according to Carpzov, is more
stupid and diffuse than either of the preceding, They are all three
of very late date.
X. A Targum on the books of Chronicles, which for a long time
was unknown both to Jews and Christians, was discovered in the
'library at Erfurt 9 belonging to the ministers of the Augsburg con-
fession, by Matthias Frederick Beck ; who published it in 1680, 3, 4,
in two quarto volumes. Another edition was published at Amster-
dam by the learned David Wilkiiis (1715, 4toA from a manuscript
in the university library at Cambridge. It is Wore complete than
Beck's edition, and supplies "many of its deficiencies. This Tai-gum,
hoxvever, is of very little value ? like all the other Chaldee para-
phrases, it blends legendary tales with the narrative, and introduces
numerous Greek words, such as o^Xoj, <rop*fa, &?%<&, &c,
XI. Of all the Chaldee paraphrases above noticed, the Targums
of Onkelos and Jonathan Beit Uzziel are most highly valued by the
Jews, who implicitly receive their expositions of doubtful passages.
Shickhard, Mayer, Helvicus, Leasden, HoLtinger, and Dr. Prideaux,
i> 3
38 On the Antient Persians. [Part I. Ch.
have conjectured that some Chaldee Targum was in use in the syno-
gogue where our Lord read Isa. Ixi. I, 2. (Luke iv. 17 19.); and
that he quoted PsaL xxii. 1. when on the cross (Matt, xxvii. 46.) not
out of the Hebrew text, but out of a Chaldee paraphrase. But
there does not appear to be sufficient ground for this hypothesis :
for as the Chaldee or East Aramaean dialect was spoken at Jeru-
salem, it is at least as probable that Jesus Christ interpreted the
Hebrew into the vernacular dialect in the first instance, as that he
should have .read from a Targum ; and, when on the cross, it was
perfectly natural that he should speak in the same language, rather
than in the Biblical Hebrew ; which, we have already seen, was cul-
tivated and studied by the priests and Levites as a learned language.
The Targum of Rabbi Joseph the Blind, in which the words cited
by our Lord are to be found, is so long posterior to the time of his
crucifixion, that it cannot be received as evidence. So numerous,
indeed, are the variations, and so arbitrary are the alterations occur-
ring in the manuscripts of the Chaldee paraphrases, that Dr. Ken*
nicott has clearly proved them to have been designedly altered in
compliment to the previously corrupted copies of the Hebrew text;
or, in other words, that " alterations have been made wilfully in the
Chaldee paraphrase to render that paraphrase, in some places, more
conformable to the words of the Hebrew text, where those HebrW
words are supposed to be right, bftt had themselves been Corrupted*" 1
But notwithstanding all their deficiencies and interpolations, the
Targums, especially those of Onkelos and Jonathan, are of consi-
derable importance in the interpretation of the Scriptures, not only
as they supply the meanings of words or phrases occurring but once
in the Old Testament, but also because they reflect considerable
light on the Jewish rites, ceremonies, laws, customs, usages, j&c. men-
tioned or alluded to in both Testaments. But it is in esfaflishing
the genuine meaning of particular prophecies relative to the Mes-
siah, in opposition to the false explications of the Jews and Anti-
trinitarians, that these Targums are pre-eminently useful Bishop
Walton, Dr. Prideaux, Pfeiffer, Carpzov, and Rambach, ha^e illus-
trated this remark by numerous examples. Bishop Patrick^ and
Drs. Gill and Clarke, in their respective Commentaries on the Bible,
have inserted many valuable elucidations from *he Chaldee f ara-
phrasts. Leusden recommends that no one should attempt to read*,
their writings, nor indeed to learn the Chaldee dialect, who is notf
previously well-grounded in Hebrew ; he advises the Chaldee text
of Daniel and Ezra to be first read either with his own Chaldee 1
Manual or with Btoxtorf's Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon; a%r
which the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan may be perused, with
the help of Buxtorf's Chaldee an*Syriac Lexicon, and of De La
work,Zte Comenientia Focabularum Rabbiniconm cum Gr&cis et
busdam aim linguis Europais. Amstelodami, 1648, Uto. 3
' ..'!.-.; : . f .
l ,Df. Kennicott's Second Dissertation, pp. 167 393, ,, ^>,-*
a && a notice of the principal editions of the Chaldee Paraphrases in P&. 3^89*
Appcndw to this volume, * ,
IL Sect. II.] The Septuagint Gnek Version. 39
SECTION IL
ON THE ANTIENT GREEK VERSIONS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT.
I. The SEPTUAGINT; 1. History of it ; 2. A Critical Account*
of its Execution / 3. What' Manuscripts tjuere used by its Authors;
4. Account of the Biblical Labours of Origen ; 5. Notice of the Re-
censions or Editions ofEuseoius and Pamphilus, ofLucian^ and ofHe-
si/chius j 6* Peculiar Importance of the Septuagint Version in the
Criticism and Interpretation of the New Testament ; II. Account of
other Greek Versions of the Old Testament ; 1. Version of AQUILA ;
2. Of THEODOTION ; 3. Of SYMMACHUS ; 4-, 5, 6. Anonymous
Versions. III. References in Antient Manuscripts to other Versions.
I, AMONG the Greek versions of the Old Testament, the ALEX-
ANDRIAN or SEPTUAGINT, as it is generally termed, is the most
antient and valuable ; and was held in so much esteem both by
the Jews and by the first Christians, as to be constantly read in
the synagogues and churches. Hence it is uniformly cited by the
early fathers, whether Greek or Latin, and from this version all the
translations into other languages, which were antiently approved by
the Christian Church, were executed (with the exception of the
Syriac), as the Arabic, Armenian, Ethiopic, Gothic, and Old Italic
or the Latin version in use before the time of Jerome : and to this
day the Septuagint is exclusively read in the Greek and most other
Oriental churches. 1 This version has derived its name either from
the Jewish account of seventy-two persons having been employed to
make it, or from its having received the approbation of the Sanhe-
drin, or great council of the Jews, which consisted of seventy, or, more
correctly, of seventy-two persons. Much uncertainty, however, has
prevailed^ concerning the real history of this antient version: and
while some have strenuously advocated its miraculous and "divine
origin, other eminent philologists have laboured to prove that it must
have been executed by several persons and at different times.
1. According to one account, Ptolemy Philadelphia, king of Egypt,
caused this translation to be made for the use of the library which he
had founded at Alexandria, at the request and with the advice of the
celebrated Demetrius Phalereus, his principal librarian, For this
purpose, it is reported, that he sent Aristeas and Andreas, two distin-
guished officers of his court to Jerusalem, on an embassy to Eleazar,
1 Walton, Prol. c. ix. (pp. 333 ^G9.)j from which, and from the following authorities,
our account of the Septuagint is derived, viz. Bauer, Critica Sacra, pp. 243 273. who
has chiefly followed Hody's book, hereafter noticed, in the history of the Septuagint ver-
sion : Dr. Pridcaux, Connection, part a. book i. sub anno sfV. (vol. ii. pp. 27^49,) ;
Masch's Preface to part ii. of his edition of Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, in which the
history of the Septuagint version- is minutely examined; Morus, in Ernesti, vol. ii. pp, 50
81., 101 119. ; Carpzov, Critica Sacra, pp. 481 551. ; Masch an dBoerner 'sedition of
Le Long's Bibliotheca Sacra, part ii. vol. ii. pp. 216 220., 256 304. ; Thomas, Intro-
ductio in Hermeneuticam Sacrum utriusque Testament!, pp. 228253. Harles, Brevior
Notitia Litteraturse Grsocse, pp. 638 G43. ; and Renouard, Annales de Plinprimerie des
Aides, torn. i. p. 140. See also Orfgenis Hexapla, a Montfaueon, torn. i. Proelim. Diss.
pp. 17 35. A full account of the manuscripts and editions of the Greek Scriptures is
given in the preface to vol. i. of the edition of the Septuagint commenced by ^ the late
JRev. Dr. Holmes, of which an account is given in pp, 37 3 88, of the Appendix to this
olume.
D 4
40 Antient Versions of the Old Testament. [Part I. Ch.
then high priest of the Jews, to request of the latter a copy of the
Hebrew Scriptures, and that there might also be sent to him seventy-
two persons (six chosen out of each of the twelve tribes), who were
equally well skilled in the Hebrew and Greek languages. These
learned men were accordingly shut up in the island of Pharos :
where, having agreed in the translation of each period after a mutual
conference, Demetrius wrote down their version as they dictated it
to him : and thus, in the space of seventy-two days, the whole was
accomplished. This relation is derived from a letter ascribed to
Aristeas himself, the authenticity of which has been greatly disputed.
If, as there is every reason to believe is the case, this piece is a for-
gery, it was made at a very early period : for it was in existence in
the time of Josephus 9 who has made use of it in his Jewish Antiqui-
ties. The veracity of Aristeas's narrative was not questioned until
the seventeenth or eighteenth century : at which time, indeed, bibli-
cal criticism was, comparatively, in its infancy, Vives ] 5 Scaligcr -,
Vaii Dale 3 , Dr. Pricleaux, and, above all, Dr. Hocly 4 , were the prin-
cipal writers in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries who attacked
the genuineness of the pretended narrative of Aristeas ; and though
it was ably vindicated by Bishop Walton 5 , Isaac Vossius 6 , Whiston ',
Brett s , and other modern writers, the majority of the learned in our
own time are fully agreed in considering it as fictitious.
Philo the Jew, who also notices the Septuagint version, was igno-
rant of most of the circumstances narrated by Aristeas ; but he relates
others which appear not less extraordinary. According to him,
Ptolemy Philadelphus sent to Palestine for some learned Jews, whose
number he does not specify : and these going over to the island of
Pharos, there executed so many distinct versions, all of which so
exactly and uniformly agreed in sense, phrases, and words, as proved
them to have been not common interpreters ; but men prophetically
inspired and divinely directed, who had every word dictated to them-
by the Spirit of God throughout the entire translation. He adds
that an annual festival was celebrated by the Alexandrian Jews in
the isle of Pharos, where the version was made, until his time, to pre-
serve the memory of it, and to thank God for so great a benefit. 9
Justin Martyr, who flourished in the middle of the second century,
about one hundred years after Philo, relates 10 a similar story, with
the addition of the seventy interpreters being shut up each in his
own separate cell (which had been erected for that purpose by order
of Ptolemy Philadelphus) ; and that here they composed so many
distinct versions, word for word, in the very same expressions, to the
1 In a note on Augustine de Civitate Dei, lib. viii. c. 42.
* lii a note on Eusebius's Chronicle, no. MDCCXXXIV.
3 Dissertatio super Aristca, de LXX interpretibus, e. Amst. 1705, 4to.
* De Bibliorum Grajcorum Textibus, "Versionibus Gra?cis 3 et Lathul Vulgatiu libri iv.
cul prasraittitur Aristeas Historia, folio, Oxon. 1705.
& |d. c. ix. 310, pp. 338359.
6 Be LXX Interpretibus, Hag. Com. 1661, 4to.
J In tie Appendix to his work on The Literal Accomplishment of Scripture Pro-
pbecies," ^Ikradon, 1724, Svo,
* Disse^tio^ on th<* Septuagint, in Bishop Watson's Collection of Theological Tracts,
vol. in. p, 20. et segv D
B De Vita MORIS. Hlv ii- 10 r^ rtt , f A r:n*
II. Sect. II.] The Scptuagint Greek Version. " 14
great admiration of the king; who, not doubting that this version
was divinely inspired} loaded the interpreters with honours, and dis-
missed them to their own country, with magnificent presents. The
good father adds, that the ruins of these cells were visible in his
time. But this narrative of Justin's is directly at variance with se-
veral circumstances recorded by Aristeas ; such, for instance, as the
previous conference or deliberation of the translators, and, above all,
the very important point of the version being dictated to Demetrius..,
Phalereus. Epiphanius, a writer of the fourth century, attempts to
harmonise all these accounts by shutting up the translators two and
two, in thirty-six cells, where they might consider or deliberate, and
by stationing a copyist in each cell, to whom the translators dictated
their labours : the result of all which was the production of thirty-
six inspired versions, agreeing most uniformly together.
It is not a little remarkable that the Samaritans have traditions in
favour of their version of the Pentateuch, equally extravagant with
those preserved by the Jews. In the Samaritan Chronicle of Abui
Phatach, which was compiled in the fourteenth century from antient
and modern authors both Hebrew and Arabic, there is a story to
the following effect : That Ptolemy Philadelphia, in the tenth year
of his reign, directed his attention to the difference subsisting between
the Samaritans and the Jews concerning the law ; the former receiv-
ing only the Pentateuch, and rejecting every other work ascribed to
the prophets by the Jews, In order to determine this difference, he
commanded the two nations to send deputies to Alexandria. The
Jews entrusted this mission to Osar, the Samaritans to Aaron, to
whom several other associates were added. Separate apartments ia
a particular quarter of Alexandria, were assigned to each of these
strangers ; who were prohibited from having any personalinte^^wme,
and each of them had a Greek scribe to write his version. ^ Thus
were the law and other Scriptures translated by the Samaritans; whose
version being most carefully examined, the king was convinced that
their text was more complete than that of the Jews. Such is the narra-
tive of Abul Phatach, divested however of numerous marvellous circum-
stances, with which it has been decorated by the Samaritans ; who are
not surpassed even by the Jews in their partiality for idle legends.
A fact, buried under such a mass of fables as the translation of
the Septuagiut has been by the historians, who have pretended to
record it, necessarily loses all its historical character, which indeed
we are fully justified in disregarding altogether. Although there is
no doubt but that some truth is concealed under this load of fables,
yet it is by no means an easy task to discern the truth from what is
false : the following, however s is the result of our researches concern-
ing this celebrated version,
It is probable that the seventy interpreters, as they ate called,
executed their vesion of the Pentateuch during the joint reigns of
Ptolemy Lagus, and his son Philadelphia The Pseudo-Aristeas,
Jofltthus, Philo, and many other writers, whom it were tedious UD
eu mSernte, relate that this version was made during the reign of
Ptolemy II, or Philadelphia : Joseph Ben Gorion, however,, among
42 Antient Versions of the Old Testament. [Part I. Ch.
the Rabbins, Theodoret, and many other Christian writers, refer
its date to the time of Ptolemy Lagus. Now these two traditions
can be reconciled only by supposing the version to have been per-
formed during the two years when Ptolemy Philadelphia shared
the throne with his father; which date coincides with the third and
fourth years of the hundred and twenty-third olympiad, that is,
about the years 286 and 285, before the vulgar Christian sera.
JFurther, this version was made neither by the command of Ptolemy,
nor at the request nor under the superintendence of Demetrius Pha-
lereus ; but was voluntarily undertaken by the Jews for the use of
their countrymen. It is well known, that, at the period above
noticed, there was a great multitude of Jews settled in Egypt, par-
ticularly at Alexandria : these, being most strictly observant of the
religious institutions and usages of their forefathers, had their
Sanhedrin, or grand council composed of seventy or seventy-two
members, and very numerous synagogues, in which the law was
read to them on every sabbath ; and as the bulk of the common
people were no longer acquainted with biblical Hebrew (the Greek
language alone being used in their ordinary intercourse), it became
necessary to translate the Pentateuch into Greek for their use.
This is a far more probable account of the origin of the Alexandrian
version than the traditions above stated. If this translation had been
made by public authority, it would unquestionably have been per-
formed under the direction of the Sanhedrin: who would have
examined, and perhaps corrected it, if it had been the work of a
single individual, previously to giving it the stamp of their appro-
bation, ^and introducing it into the synagogues. In either case the
translation would, probably, be denominated the Septuagint, because
the Sanhedrin was composed of seventy or seventy-two members,
It is even possible that the Sanhedrin, in order to ascertain the fide-
lity of the work, might have sent to Palestine for some learned men,
of whose assistance and advice they would have availed themselves
in examining the version. This fact, if it could be proved (for it
is offered as a mere conjecture), would account for the story of the
king of Egypt's sending an embassy to Jerusalem. There is, how-
ever, one circumstance which proves that, in executing this trans-
lation, the synagogues were originally in contemplation, viz. that
all the antient writers unanimously concur in saying that the Penta-
teuch was first translated. The five books of Moses, indeed, were the
only books read in the synagogues until the time of Antiochus Epi-
phanes, king of Syria : who having forbidden that practice in Pales-
tine, the Jews evaded his commands by substituting for the Penta-
teuch the reading of the prophetic books. When, afterwards, the
Jews were delivered from the tyranny of the kings of Syria, they
read the law and the prophets alternately in their synagogues: and
the same custom was adopted by the Hellenistic or Graecisimr Jews.
^ ?: But whatever was the real number of the authors of the ver~
siqn, thar introduction of Coptic words, (such as up*, ,,, 09*^ &e.)
as well as their rendering of ideas purely Hebrew altogether ia the
Egyptian manner, clearly prove that they were natives of Egypt,'
II. Sect. II.] The Septuagint Greek Version. 43
Thus they express the creation of the world, not by the proper
Greek word KTI2IS, but by FENESlS, a term employed by the
philosophers of Alexandria to express the origin of the universe.
The Hebrew word Thummim, (Exod. xxviii. 30.) which signifies
perfections, they render AAH0EIA, truth. 1 The difference of style
also indicates the version to have been the work not of one but of
several translators, and to have been executed at different times.
The best qualified and most able among them was the translator of
the Pentateuchj who was evidently master of both Greek and He-
brew: he has religiously followed the Hebi'ew text, and has in
various instances introduced the most suitable and best chosen ex-
pressions. From the very close resemblance subsisting between
the text of the Greek version and the text of the Samaritan Penta-
teuch, Louis de Dieu, Selden, Whiston, Hassencamp, and Bauer,
are of opinion that the author of the Alexandrian version made it
from the Samaritan Pentateuch. And in proportion as these two
correspond, the Greek differs from the Hebrew. This opinion is
further supported by the declarations of Origen and Jerome, that
the translator found the venerable name of Jehovah not in the let-
ters in common use, but in very antient characters ; and also by
the fact that those consonants in the Septuagint are frequently con-
founded together, the shapes of which are similar in the Samaritan,
but not in the Hebrew alphabet. This hypothesis, however inge-
nious and plausible, is by no means determinate : and what militates
most against it is, the inveterate enmity subsisting between the Jews
and Samaritans, added to the constant and unvarying testimony of
antiquity that the Greek version of the Pentateuch was executed by
Jews, There is no other way by which to reconcile these conflict-
ing opinions, than by supposing either that the manuscripts used by
the Egyptian Jews approximated towards the letters and text of the J
Samaritan Pentateuch, or that the translators of the Septuagint
made use of manuscripts written in antient characters.
Next to the Pentateuch, for ability and fidelity of execution, ranks
the translation of the book of Proverbs, the author of which was
well skilled in the two languages : Michaelis is of opinion that, of
all the books of the Septuagint, the style of the Proverbs is the best,
the translators having clothed the most ingenious thoughts in as neat
and elegant language as was ever used by a Pythagorean sage, to
express his philosophic maxims. a The translator of the book of
Job being acquainted with the Greek poets, his style is more elegant
and studied : but he was not sufficiently master of the Hebrew lan-
guage and literature, and consequently his version is very oft&i
erroneous* Many of the historical passages are interpolated t*nd[
in the poetical parts there are several passages wanting : Jerome, in
i Tho reason of this appears from Diodorus Siculus, who informs us that the iJVesident
of the Egyptian courts of justice wore round his nec&% golden chain, at which was sus-
pended an image set round with precious stones, which was called TRUTH, o vpotfrj-yopevov
Mif0itar lib. c. 75. torn. i. p. 225. (edit* Bipont) Bauer, (Grit Sacr. pp. 244,345.)
and Morus, (Acroascs in Eniesti, totn.ii* pp, 6781.) have given several examples,
proving from internal evidence that the authors of the Septuagint version were Egyptian.
* Micbiwlis, Introd, to New Test, vol. i. p. 113.
44 Antimt Versions of the Old Testament. jTart I. Ch.
his preface to the book of Job, specifies as many as Seventy or eighty
verses. These omissions were supplied by Origen from Theodo-
tion's translation. * The book of Joshua could not have been trans-
lated till upwards of twenty years after the death of Ptolemy Lagus :
for, in chapter viiL verse 18., the translator has introduced the
word yaio-oj, a word of Gallic origin, denoting a short dart or jave-
lin peculiar to the Gauls, who made in irruption into Greece in
the third year of the 125th olympiad, or B.C. 278; and ii was not
till some time after that event that the Egyptian kings took Gallic
mercenaries into their pay and service.
During the reign of Ptolemy Philometer, the book of Esther,
together with the Psalms and Prophets, was translated. The sub-
scription annexed to the version of Esther, expressly states it to
have been finished on the fourth year of that sovereign's reign, or
about .the year 177 before the Christian aera: the Psalms and
Prophets, in all probability, were translated still later, because the
Jews did not begin to read them in their synagogues till about the
year 170 before Christ. The Psalms and Prophets were translated
by men every way unequal to the task: Jeremiah is the best ex-
ecuted among the Prophets; and next to this the books of Amos and
Ezekiel are placed: the important prophecies of -Isaiah were trans-
lated, according to Bishop Lowth, upwards of one hundred years
after the Pentateuch, and by a person by no means adequate to the
undertaking; there being hardly any book of the Old Testament so
ill rendered in the Septuagint as this of Isaiah, (which together with
other parts of the Greek version) has come down to us in a bacl
condition, incorrect, and with frequent omissions and interpolations :
and so very erroneous was the version of Daniel, that it was totally
rejected by the antient church, and Theodotion's translation was
substituted for it. Some fragments of the Septuagint version of
Daniel, which for a long time was supposed to have "been lost, were
discovered and published at Rome in 1772, from which it appears
that its author had but an imperfect knowledge of the Hebrew
language.
No date has been assigned for the translation of the books of
Judges, Ruth, Samuel, and Kings, which appear to have been ex-
ecuted by, one and the same author; who though he does not make
use of so_many Hebraisms as the translators of the other books, is
yet not without his peculiarities.
3. Before we conclude the history of the Septuagint version, it
may not be irrelevant briefly to notice a question which has greatly
exercised the ingenuity of biblical philologers, viz. from what MANU-
SCRIPTS did the seventy interpreters execute their translation?
Professor Tyschen 1 has offered an hypothesis that they did not*
translate the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek, but that it has been
transcribed in Hebrauo- Greek characters, and that from this tran-
script their version was made: this hypothesis has been examined by
II. Sect. IL] The Septuagint Greek Torsion. 45
several German critics, and by none with more acumen than by
Dathe, in the preface to his Latin version of the minor prophets ] :
but as the arguments are not of a nature to admit of abridgment,
this notice may perhaps suffice. The late eminently learned Bishop
Horsley doubts whether the manuscripts from which the Septuagint
version w r as made, would (if now extant) be entitled to the same
degree of credit as our modern Hebrew text, notwithstanding their
comparatively high antiquity. "There is," he observes, "certainly
much reason to believe, that after the destruction of the temple by
Nebuchadnezzar, perhaps from a somewhat earlier period, the He-
brew text was in a much worse state of corruption in the copies
which were in private hands, than it has ever been since the revision
of the sacred books by Ezra. These inaccurate copies would be
multiplied during the whole period of the captivity, and widely scat-
tered in Assyria, Persia, and Egypt; in short, through all the
regions of the dispersion. The text, as revised by Ezra, was cer-
tainly of much higher credit than any of these copies, notwithstand-
ing their greater antiquity. His edition succeeded, as it were, to the
privileges of an autograph (the autographs of the inspired writers
themselves being totally lost), and was henceforth to be considered
as the only source of authentic text: insomuch that the comparative
merit of any text now extant will depend upon the probable degree
of its approximation to, or distance from, the Esdrine edition. Nay,
if the translation of the LXX was made from some of those old ma-
nuscripts which the dispersed Jews had carried into Egypt, or from
any other of those unauthenticated copies (which is the prevailing
tradition among the Jews and is very probable, at least it cannot be
confuted) ; it will be likely that the faultiest manuscript now extant
differs less from the genuine Esdrine text, than those more antient,
which the version of the LXX represents. But, much as this con-
sideration lowers the credit of the LXX separately, for any various
reading, it adds great weight to the consent of the LXX with later
versions, and greater still to the consent of the eld versions with
manuscripts of the Hebrew, which still survive. And, as it is cer-
tainly possible that a true reading may be preserved in one solitary
manuscript, it will follow, that a true reading may be preserved in
one version : for the manuscript which contained the true reading
at the time when the version was made, may have perished since ;
so that no evidence of the reading shall now remain, but the
version ." *
The Septuagint version, though originally made for the use of the
Egyptian Jews, gradually acquired the highest authority among tbe
Jews of Palestine, who were acquainted with the Greek language,
and subsequently also among Christians : it appears, indeed, that the
legend above confuted of the translators having been divinely inspired,
was invented in order that the LXX might be held in the greater esti-
mation, Philo the Jew, a native of Egypt, has evidently followed it in
his allegorical expositions of the Mosaic law : and, though Dr. Hody
i Published at Halle, in 1790, in 8vo.
a Bishop Horsle/s Translation of Hosea, Pnef. pp. xxxvi, xx^yii, Sdedit.
46 Antient Versions of the Old Testament. [Part L Ch.
was of opinion that Josephus, who was a native of Palestine,, cor-
roborated his work on Jewish Antiquities from the Hebrew text,
yet Saimasius ? Bochart, Bauer, and others, have shown that he has
adhered to the Septuagint throughout that work. How extensively
this version was in use among the Jews, appears from the solemn
sanction given to it by the inspired writers of the New Testament,,
who have in very many passages quoted the Greek version of the
Old Testament. 1 Their example was followed by the earlier fathers
and doctors of the church, who, with the exception of Origen and
Jerome, were unacquainted with Hebrew : notwithstanding their zeal
for the word of God, they did not exert themselves to learn the ori-
ginal language of the sacred writings, but acquiesced in the Greek
representation of them; judging it, no doubt, to be fully sufficient for
all the purposes of their pious labours* " The Greek Scriptures were
the only Scriptures known to or valued by the Greeks. This was the
text commented by Chrysostom and Theodoret; it was this which
furnished topics to Athanasius, Nazianzen, and Basil. From this
fountain the stream was derived to the Latin church, first, by the
Italic or Vulgate translation of the Scriptures* which was made from
the Septuagint, and not from the Hebrew; and, secondly, by the
study of the Greek fathers. It was by this borrowed light, that the
Latin fathers illuminated the western hemisphere: and, when the
age of Cyprian, Ambrose, Augustine, and Gregory successively
passed away, this was the light put into the hands of the next dynasty
of theologists, the schoolmen, who carried on the work of theological
disquisition by the aid of this luminary and none other. So that,
either in Greek or in Latin, it was still the Septuagint Scriptures
that were read, explained, and quoted as authority, for a period of
fifteen hundred years." 2
The Septuagint version retained its authority, even with the rulers
of the Jewish synagogue, until the commencement of the first cen-
tury after Christ: when the Jews, being unable to resist the aie<m-
ments^from prophecy which were urged against them by the Chris-
tians, in order to deprive them of the benefit of that authority, be^an
to deny that it agreed with the Hebrew text. Further to discredit
the character of the Septuagint, the Jews instituted a solemn fast on
the 8th day of the month Thebet (December), to execrate the me-
mory of its having been made. Not satisfied with this measure, we
are assured by Justin Martyr, who lived in the former part of the
second century, that they proceeded to expunge several passages
out of the Septuagint; and abandoning this, adopted the version of
Aquia^a proselyte Jew of Sinope, a city of Pontus 3 : this is the
translation mentioned in the Talmud and not the Septuagint, with
which it has been confounded. 4 * D '
4. The great use, however, which had been made by the Jews
' On the quotations from the Old Testament in the New, sec
' Hebrew and Greek ntB of the
3 n ree B o te s, PP **
II. Sect. II.] The Septuagint Greek Version. '"4.7
previously to their rejection of the Septuagint, and the constant use
of it by the Christians, would naturally cause a multiplication of
copies; in which, besides the alterations designedly made by the
Jews, numerous errors became introduced, in the course of time,
from the negligence or inaccuracy of transcribers, and from glosses
or marginal notes, which had been added for the explanation of
difficult words, being suffered to creep into the text. In order to
remedy this growing evil, OJR.IGEN, in the early part of the third
century, undertook the laborious task of collating the Greek text
then in use with the original Hebrew and with other Greek transla-
tions then extant, and from the whole to produce a new recension or
revisal. Twenty-eight years were devoted to the preparation of this
arduous work, in the course of which he collected manuscripts from
every possible quarter, aided (it is said) by the pecuniary liberality
of Ambrose, an opulent man, whom he had converted from the Va-
lentinian heresy, and with the assistance of seven copyists and several
persons skilled in caligraphy, or the art of beautiful writing, Origen
commenced his labour at Caesarea, A. D. 231 ; and, it appears, finished
his Polyglott at Tyre, but in what year is not precisely known.
This noble critical work is designated by various names among
antient writers ; as Tetrapla, Hexapla^ Octapla, and JLnneapla.
The Tetrapld) contained the four Greek versions of Aquila, Sym-
machus, the Septuagint, and Theodotion, disposed in four columns 1 :
to these he added two columns more, containing the Hebrew text in
its original characters, and also in Greek letters ; these six columns,
according to Epiphanius, formed the Hexapla. Having subsequently
discovered two other Greek versions of some parts of the Scriptures,
usually called the fifth and sixth,* he added them to the preceding,
inserting them in their respective places, and thus composed the
Octapla ; and a separate translation of the Psalms, usually called the
seventh version, being afterwards added, the entire work has by some
been termed the Enneapla. This appellation, however, was never
generally adopted. But, as the two editions made by Origen gene-
rally bore the name of the Tetrapla and Hexapla, Dr. Grabe
thinks that they were thus called, not from the number of the co-
lumns, but of the versions, which were six, the seventh containing
the Psalms only. 2 Bauer, after Montfaucon, is of opinion, that
Origen edited only the Tetvapla and Hexapla ; and this appears to-
be the real fact. The following specimens from Montfaucon will
convey an idea of the construction of these two laborious works. 3
1 The late Rev. Dr. Holmes, who commenced the splendid edition of the Septuagint
noticed in pp. 37, 38. of the Appendix to this volume, was of opinion that the first column
of the Tetrapla, contained the KOWTJ, or Septuagint text commonly in use, collated with
Hebrew manuscripts by Origen, and that the other three columns were occupied by
the versions of Aquila, Syrnmachus, and Theodotion.
'J Dr. Holmes thinks that the text of the Septuagint In the Hexapla was not the
KO/T? as then in use, but as corrected in the Tetrapla, and perhaps improved by further
collations.
3 Origenis Hexapla, Pncl. Diss, torn, i, p. 16,
48
Versions of the Old Testament. [Part I. Cli.
TETRAPLA.
Gen.i. 1.
AKTAAS,
5 &eos <rvv rov ovpwov
KKI
2TMMAXO2,
Ey ct/3X?7 eicrurev 6
freos vw ovpavov /cat
01 0.
3eos rov ovpavov nai
Tf]V *ft\V.
EOAOTinN.
In this specimen the version of Aquila holds the first place, as being
most literal; the second is occupied by that of Symmachus, as ren-
dering adsensum rather than ad literam ,- the third by the beptuagmt,
and the fourth by Theodotion's translation.
ffi
x
S
ffi
II, Sect. II.] The Septuagint Greeft Version. $9
The original Hebrew being considered as the basis of the whole
work, the proximity of each translation to the text, in point of close-
ness and fidelity, determined its rank in the order of the columns :
thus Aquila's version, being the most faithful, is placed next to the
sacred text; that of Symmachus occupies the fourth column; the
Septuagint, the fifth; and Theodotion's, the sixth. The other three
anonymous translations, not containing the entire books of the Old
Testament, were placed, in the three last columns of the Enneapla,
according to the order of time in which they were discovered by
Origen,, Where the same words occurred in all the other Greek
versions, without being particularly specified, Origen designated them
by A or AO, Ao*7roi, the rest; O* F, or the three, denoted Aquila,
Symmachus, and Theodotion ; Oi A, or the four, signified Aquila,
Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodotion; and IT, TIav>rs$ 9 all
the interpreters.
The object of Origen being to correct the differences found in the
then existing copies of the Old Testament, he carefully noted the al-
terations made by him ; and for the information of those who might
consult his work, he made use of the following marks : B
1 . Where any passages appeared in the Septuagint, that were not
found in the Hebrew, he designed them by an obelus -f- with two
4,>old points : also annexed. This mark was also used to denote
words not extant in the Hebrew, but added by the Septuagint trans-
lators, either for the sake of elegance, or for the purpose of illus-
trating the sense.
2. To passages wanting in the copies of the Septuagint, and
supplied by himself from the other Greek versions, he prefixed an
asterisk x - with two bold points : also annexed, in order that his addi-
tions migfct be immediately perceived. These supplementary passages,
we are informed by Jerome, were for the most part taken from Theo-
dotion's translation; not unfrequently from that of Aquila; some-
times, though rarely, from the version of Symmachus ; and sometimes
from two or three together. But, in every case, the initial letter of
each translator's name was placed immediately after the asterisk, to
indicate the source whence such supplementary passage was taken.
And in lieu of the very erroneous Septuagint version of Daniel,
Theodotion's translation of that book was inserted entire.
3. Further, not only the passages wanting in the Septuagint were
supplied by Origen with the asterisks, as above noticed ; but also
where that version does not appear accurately to express the He-
brew original, having noted the former reading with an obelus, -T-,
he added the correct rendering from one of the other translators,
with an asterisk subjoined. Concerning the shape and uses of the
l&nniscits and /iypolcmniscus 9 two other marks used by Origen, there
is so great a difference of opinion among learned men, that it is
difficult to determine what they were. 1 Dr. Owen, after Mont-
1 Montfaucon, Prtnlim, ad tlexapla, tom.i. pp.36 42. Holmes, Vetus Testamen-
tum Gracum, loin. i. Pratfat. cap. i. sect, i.~ vii. The first book of Dr. Holmes's
erudite preface is translated into English in the Christian Observer for 1S21, vol. xx,
pp. 544548, 61QU-CI5, C7C 683, 74G 70
VOL, U, E
50 Antient Versions of the Old Testament. [Part I. Ch.
faucon, supposes them to have been marks of better and more ac-
curate renderings.
In the Pentateuch, Origen compared the Samaritan text with the
Hebrew as received by the Jews, and noted their differences. To
each of the translations inserted in his Hexapla was prefixed an
account of the author; each had its separate prolegomena; and the
ample margins were filled with notes. A few fragments of these
prolegomena and marginal annotations have been preserved ; but
nothing remains of his history of the Greek versions. l
Since Origen's time, biblical critics have distinguished two editions
or exemplars of the Septuagint the KOIVT] or common text, with all
its errors and imperfections, as it existed previously to his collation ;
and the Hexaplar text, or that corrected by Origen himself. For
nearly fifty years was this great man's stupendous work buried in a
corner of the city of Tyre, probably on account of the very great ex-
pense of transcribing forty or fifty volumes, which far exceeded the
means of private individuals : and here, perhaps, it might have pe-
rished in oblivion, if Eusebius and Pamphilus had not discovered it,
and deposited it in the library of Pamphilus the martyr at Csesarea,
where Jerome saw it about the middle of the fourth century. As we
have no account whatever of Origen's autograph, after this time, it is
most probable that it perished in the year 653, on the capture of that
city by the Arabs : and a few imperfect fragments, collected from ma-
nuscripts of the Septuagint and the Catense of the Greek fathers, are
all that now remain of a work, which in the present improved state of
sacred literature would most eminently have assisted in the interpret-
ation and criticism of the ''Old Testament.
5. As the Septuagint version had been read in the church from the
commencement of Christianity, so it continued to be used in most of
the Greet churches: and the text, as corrected by Origen, was tran-
scribed for their use, together with his critical marks. Hence, in the
progress of time, from the negligence or inaccuracy of copyists, nume-
rous errors were introduced into this version, which rendered a new
revisal necessary ; and, as all the Greek churches did not receive
Origan's biblical labours with equal deference, three principal recen-
sions were undertaken nearly at the same time, of which we are now
to offer a brief notice.
The first was the edition, undertaken by Eusebius and Pamphilus
about the year 300, from the Hexaplar text, with the whole of Ori-
gen's critical marks : it was not only adopted by the churches of Pa-
lestme, but was also deposited in almost every library. By frequent
i The best edition, unhappily very rare, of the remains of Origen's Hexapla, is that of
Montfaucon f< m two volumes, folio, Paris, 1713. The first volume contains a very va-
luable preliminary disquisition on the Hebrew text and different antient Greek versions, of
why* we have liberally availed ourselves in the preceding and following pages together
OrLn nu V cc . oullt of Origen's biblical labours, and some inedited fragments of
Ungen, &c. To these succeed the remains of the Hexapla, from Genesis to the book of
rauns inclusive, The second volume comprises the rest of the Hexapla to the end of
the twelve minor prophets^ together with Greek and Hebrew Lexicons to the Hexapla.
bv P P r??! 1 ^ i gen !.?"** work were reprinted in two vols. 8vo. (Lipsiw, 1769,)
Dy i_, J?. jjaftrdt; whose edition has been most severely criticised by Fischer in his Pro-
Jusiones ue Versiombus Gra>iic T.ihvnrmvi \r T T :**,, ..,,,, T.T \ %.-- .
Juicieiai um Jriebr.
II. Sect. II.] The Septuagint Greek Version. 51
transcriptions, however, Origen's marks or notes became, in the course
of a few yearsj so much changed, as to be of little use 3 and were finally
omitted : this omission only augmented the evil, since even in the time
of Jerome it was no longer possible to know what belonged to the
translators, or what were Origen's own corrections ; and now it may
almost be considered as a hopeless task to distinguish between them.
Contemporary with the edition of Eusebius and Pamphilus was the
recension of the Ko/yij, or vulgate text of the Septuagint, conducted
by Lucian, a presbyter of the church at Antioch, who suffered mar-
tyrdom A. D. 311. He took the Hebrew text for the basis of his
edition, which was received in all the eastern churches from Con-
stantinople to Antioch. While Lucian was prosecuting his biblical
labours, Hesychius, an Egyptian bishop, undertook a similar work,
which was generally received in the churches of Egypt. He is sup-
posed to have introduced fewer alterations than Lucian ; and his edi-
tion is cited by Jerome as the Exemplar Alexandrinum. Syncellus 1
mentions another revisal of the Septuagint text by Basil bishop of
Caesarea : but this, we have every reason to believe, has long since
perished. All the manuscripts of the Septuagint now extant, as well
as the printed editions, are derived from the three recensions above
mentioned, although biblical critics are by no means agreed what
particular recension each manuscript has followed. 2
6, The importance of the Septuagint version for the right under- "
standing of the sacred text, has been variously estimated by different
learned men ; while some have elevated it to an equality with the
original Hebrew, others have rated it far below its real value. The
great authority which it formerly enjoyed, certainly gives it a ^ claim
to a high degree of consideration. It was executed long before the
Jews were prejudiced against Jesus Christ as the Messiah ; and it
was the means of preparing the world at large for his appearance, by
making known the types and prophecies concerning him. With all
its faults and imperfections, therefore, this version is of more use in
correcting the Hebrew text than any other that is extant ; because
its authors had better opportunities of knowing the propriety and
extent of the Hebrew language, than we can possibly have at this
distance of time. The Septuagint, likewise, being written in the same
dialect us the New Testament (the formation of whose style was in-
fluenced by it), it becomes a very important source of interpretation :
lor riot only does it frequently serve to determine the genuine read-
ing, but also to ascertain the meaning of particular idiomatic expres-
sions and passages in the New Testament, the true import of which
could not be known but from their use in the Septuagint. 13 Grotius,
Keuchenius, Biol, and Schleusner, are the critics who have most suc-
cessfully applied this version to theinterpretationof the New Testament*
i Chronographia nb adamo usque ad Dioclcsiannm, p, 203.
* Dr, Holmes has given a copious and interesting account of the additions of Lucian
and Ilesydiiiis, and of tlie sources of the Septuagint toyt in the manuscripts of the Pen-
tateuch, which arc now extant. Tom. i, I'raof. cap. i. sect, viii. et seq.
9 In the Eclectic Review for 1BOG (vol if. parti, pp. 3.'J7 iM7.) the reader will find
many examples adduced, confirming the remarks above offered, concerning the value and
importance of the Septuagint version.
E 2
52 Antient Versions of the Old Testament. [Part L Ch.
II. The importance of the Septuagint, in the criticism and inter-
pretation of the Scriptures, especially of the New Testament } 9 will
justify the length of the preceding account of that celebrated version :
it now remains that we briefly notice the other antient Greek trans-
lations, which have already been incidentally mentioned ; viz. those of
Aquila, Theodotion, Symmachus, and the three anonymous versions,,
usually cited as the fifth, sixth, and seventh versions, from which
Origen compiled his Tetrapla and Hexapla.
1. The Version ofAguiLA. The author of this translation was
a native of Sinope in Pontus, who flourished in the second century of
the Christian asra : he was of Jewish descent; and having renounced
Christianity, he undertook his version to oblige the Jews, who then
began to be disgusted with the Septuagint, as being too paraphrastic.
It is certain that he lived during the reign of the emperor Adrian,
and that his translation was executed before the year 160; as it is
cited both by Justin Martyr, who wrote about that time, and by
Irenseus between the years 170 and 176. The version of Aquila is
extremely literal, and is made without any regard to the genius of the
Greek language : it is, however, of considerable importance iu the
criticism of the Old Testament, as it serves to show the readings
contained in the Hebrew MSS. of his time. Professor Dathe has
collated several passages from this translation, and has applied them
to the illustration of the prophet Hosea. a , The fragments of Aquila
and of the other Greek versions were collected and published, first
by Flaminio Nobili, in his notes to the Roman edition of the Septua-
gint, and after him by Drusius, in his Veterum Interpretum Gracorum
Fragmenta (Arnheim, 1622, 4-to.) 3 ; and also by Montfaucon in his
edition of Origen's Hexapla above noticed. According to Jerome,
Aquila published two editions of his version, the second of which was
the most literal : it was allowed to be read publicly in the Jews' syna-
gogues, by the hundred and twenty-fifth Novel of the emperor Justinian.
2, THEODOTION was a native of Ephesus, and is termed by Jerome
and Eusebius an Ebionite or semi- Christian. He was nearly con-
temporary with Aquila, and his translation is cited by Justin Martyr,
in his Dialogue with Tryphon the Jew, which was composed about
the year 160. The version of Theoclotion holds a middle rank be-
1 The Book," says the profound critic Michaelis, " most necessary to be read and
understood by every man who studies the New Testament, is, without doubt, the Sen*
tuagint ; which alone has been of more service than all the passages from the profane
authors collected together. It should be read in the public schools by those who are
destined for the church ; should form the subject of a course of lectures at the university
u x? the constant companion of an expositor of the New Testament." Introduction to
the New Test, vol. i. p. 177, "About the year 1785," says Dr. A. Clarke (speak-
ing of his biblical labours), " I began to read the Septuagint regularly, in order to
acquaint myself more fully with the phraseology of the New Testament, The study of this
version served more to expand and illuminate my mind than all the theological works I had
ever consulted. I had proceeded but a short way in it, before I was convinced that the
prejudices against it were utterly unfounded 5 and that it was of incalculable advantage
towards a proper understanding if the literal sense of Scripture. 11 Dr. Clarke's Com-
mentary, vol. i. General Preface, p. xv.
i*L Di !!! er ? tio hilol g ko - Cri t'ca in Aquite Reliquias Interpretation is Hose*, (Linda.
3757, 4to); which is reprinted in p.,1. et seq. of Rosenmiiller's Collection of his
Opuscula ad Crisin et Interpretationem Veteris Testament!/' Lipsfas, 1796, 8vo,
a Ihis work of Drusius's is also to be found in the sixth volume of Bishop Walton's
1 olygtott. *
IL Sect. II.] Versions of Symmachus and others. 53
tween the servile closeness of Aquilaand the freedom of Symmachus
it is a kind of revision of the Septuagint made after the original He-
brew, and supplies some deficiencies in the Septuagint; but where he
translates without help, he evidently shows himself to have been but
indifferently skilled in Hebrew. Theodotion 's translation of the
book of Daniel was introduced into the Christian churches, as being
deemed more accurate than that of the Septuagint.
3. SYMMACHUS, we are informed by Eusebius and Jerome, was a
semi-Christian, or Ebionite : for the account given of him by Epi-
phanius, (that he was first a Samaritan, then a Jew, next a Christian,
and last of all an Ebionite,) is generally disregarded as unworthy of
credit. Concerning the precise time when he flourished, learned men
are of different opinions. Epiphanius places him under the reign of
Commodus II. an imaginary emperor : Jerome, however, expressly
states, that his translation appealed after that of Theodotion: and as
Uymmachus was evidently unknown to Irenasus, who cites the ver-
sions of Aquila and Theodotion, it is probable that the date assigned
by Jerome is the true one. Montfaucon accordingly places Symma-
chus a short lime after Theodotion, that is, about the year 200. The
version of Symmachus, who appears to have published a second edi-
tion of it revised, is by no moans so literal as that of Aquila; he was
certainly nnich better acquainted with the laws of interpretation than
the latter, and has endeavoured, not unsuccessfully, to render the
Hebrew idioms with Greek precision. Bauer l and Morus a have
given specimens of the utility of this version for illustrating both the
Old and New Testaments, Dr. Owen has printed the whole of the
first chapter of the book of Genesis according to the Septuagint ver-
sion, together with the Greek translations of Aquila, Theodotion, and
Symmachus, in columns, in order to show their respective agreement
or discrepancy. This we are obliged to omit, on account of its length ;
but the following observations of that eminent critic on their relative
merits (founded' on an accurate comparison of them with each other,
and with the original Hebrew, whence they were made,) are too va~
luublo to be disregarded. He remarks,
1. With respect to Aquila, (1) That his translation is close and
servile abounding in Hebraisms and scrupulously conformable to
the letter of the text (2) That the author, notwithstanding he meant
to disgrace and overturn the version of the Seventy, yet did not scruple
to make use of it, and frequently to borrow bis expressions from it.
2. With respect to Theodotion^ (1) That he makes great use of the.
two former versions following sometimes the diction of the one,
and sometimes that of the other nay, often commixing them both
together in the compass of one and the same verse ; and, (2) That he
did not keep so strictly and closely to the version of the Seventy, as
some have unwarily represented. 3 He borrowed largely from that of
Aquila; but adapted it to his own style.' And as his style was similar
i Critica Sacro, pp. 277, 278. " Acroases Hcrmcneuticre, torn. ii. pp, 127, 128,
9 Thcodotion, qui in croforis cum Ixx traittlatoribng facit. Hicron. Ep. ad Marc. oil.
Licet Aiitem Thoodolio Ixv, Interprotmn vcstigio fore semper liicrctit, &c. Monlf. Pracl,
iu lloxapl* p. 57,
h J
54. Antient Versions of the Old Testament. [Part I. Ch.
to that of the LXX, Origen, perhaps for the sake of uniformity, supplied
the additions inserted in the Hexapla chiefly from this Version.
3. With respect to Symmachiis^ (1) That his version, though con-
cise, is free and paraphrastic regarding the sense, rather than the
words, of the original; (&) That he often borrowed from the three
other versions but much oftener from those of his immediate pre-
decessors, than from the Septuagint; and, (3) It is observed by Mont-
faucon \ that he kept close to the Hebrew original ; and never intro-
duced any thing from the Septuagint, that was not to be found in his
Hebrew copy : but it evidently appears from verse 20. where we
read, xcu sysvero ovrwc that either the observation is false, or that
the copy he used was different from the present Hebrew copies.
The 30th verse has also a reading it may perhaps be an inter-
polation to which there is nothing answerable in the Hebrew, or
in any other of the Greek versions. 2
4 5 5 3 (j. The three anonymous translations, usually called the
fifth, sixth) and seventh versions, derive their names from the order in
which Origen disposed them in his columns. The author of the sixth
version was evidently a Christian: for he renders Habakkuk iii. 13.
{Thou wentest forth for the deliverance of thy people, evenjfo 1 the deli-
verance of thine anointed ones 3 ,) in the following manner : EijA0ss rov
(Twa-ai TOV Aotov croy ;# lyjcrou roy Xgjorou crou ; i, e. Thou wentcst forth to
save thy people through Jestis tliij Christ* The dates of these three
versions are evidently subsequent to those of Aquila, Theodotion,
and Symmachus : from the fragments collected by Montfaucon, it
appears that they all contained the Psalms and minor prophets ; the
jjfth and sixth further ,comprised the Pentateuch and Song of Solomon;
and from some fragments of the Jifth and seventh versions found by
Brans in a Syriac Hexaplar manuscript at Paris, it appears that they
also contained the two books of Kings. Bauer is of opinion that the
author of the seventh version was a Jew.
III. Besides the fragments of the preceding antient versions, taken
from Origen's Hexapla, there are found in the margins of the manu-
scripts of the Septuagint some additional marks or notes, containing
various renderings in Greek of some passages in the Old Testament :
these are cited as the Hebrew, Syrian, Samaritan, and Hellenistic
versions, and as the version of some anonymous author. The probable
meaning of these references it may not be improper briefly to notice.
1. The Hebrew (o E/S^aioj) is supposed by some to
(o E/S^aioj) is supposed by some to denote the
translation of Aquila, who closely and literally followed the Hebrew
text: but this idea was refuted by Montfaucon and Bauer, who remark,
that after the reference to the Hebrew, a reading follows, most
widely differing from Aquila's rendering. Bauer more probably
1 Ea tamen cautela ut Hebraicum exemplar unicum sequcndum sibi proponeret j nee
quklpiam ex editione TU>V O. ubi cum Hebraico non quadrabat, in interpretationem suara
refunderet. Praelim. in Hexap], p. 54.
2 Owen on the Septuagmt, pp. 124 126.
3 Archbishop Newcome's version. The authorised English translation runs thus :
te Thou wentest forth for the s.alvatiou of thy people, even for the salvation of thine
anointed."
II. Sect, II.] Various Antient Greek Versions. . 55
conjectures, that the reference o Efyaiog denotes the Hebrew text
from which the Septuagint version differs.
2. Under the name of the Syrian (5 Su^os) are intended the
fragments of the Greek version made by Sophronius, patriarch of
Constantinople, from the very popular Latin translation of Jerome,
who is supposed to have acquired the appellation of the Syrian,
from his long residence on the confines of Syria. He is thus ex-
pressly styled by Theodore of Mopsuestia in a passage cited by
Photius in his Bibliotheca. 1
3. The Samaritan (TO 2a/x,apmxoy) is supposed to refer to the
fragments of a Greek version of the Hebroso- Samaritan text, which
is attributed to the ancient Greek scholiast so often cited by Flami-
nio Nobili, and in the Greek Scholia appended to the Roman edition
of the Septuagint. Considerable doubts, however, exist concerning *
the identity of this supposed Greek version of the Samaritan text;
which, if it ever existed, Bishop Walton thinks, must be long pos-
terior in date to the Septuagint. 2
4. It is not known to which version or author the citation,
6 EAA^mos, or the Hellenic, refers : the mark 6 AAAoj, or
6 Ai/e7nypaipo, denotes some unknown author.
Before we conclude the present account of the antient Greek
versions of the Old Testament, it remains that we briefly notice the
translation preserved in St. Mark's Library at Venice, containing
the Pentateuch, Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes,
Lamentations of Jeremiah, and Prophecy of Daniel. The existence
of this version, which was for a long time buried among other liter-
ary treasures deposited in the above-mentioned library, was first
announced by Zanetti and Bongiovanni in their catalogue of its
manuscripts. The Pentateuch was published in three parts, by
M. Ammon, at Erlang, 1790, 1791, 6vo. : and the remaining boofes by
M. Villoison at Strasburgh, 1 784, Svo. The original manuscript, Mo-
relli is of opinion, was executed in the 14th century ; and the numer-
ous errors discoverable in it prove that it cannot be the autograph
of the translator. By whom this version was made, is a question
yet undetermined. Morelli thinks its author was a Jew ; Ammon
supposes him to have been a Christian monk, and perhaps a native
of Syria of the eighth or ninth century ; and Bauer, after Zeigler,
conjectures him to have been a Christian grammarian of Constan-
tinople, who had been taught Hebrew by a Western Jew. Who-
ever the translator was, his style evidently shows him to have been
deeply skilled in the different dialects of the Greek language, and
to have been conversant with the Greek poets. Equally uncertain
is the date when this version was composed : Eichhorn, Bauer, and
several other eminent biblical writers, place it between the sixth and
tenth centuries : the late Dr. Holmes supposed the author of it to
have been some Hellenistic Jew, between the ninth and twelfth cen-
turies. " Nothing can be more completely happy, or more judi-
cious, than the idea adopted by this author, of rendering the Hebrew
1 Pape 205. edit, HoesclwHi. 2 Frol, c. xi. 22. pp. 553, 554.
56 Antient Versions of the Old and New Testaments. [Part I. Ch.
text in the pure Attic dialect, and the Chaldee Jri its corresponding
Doric." 1 Dr. Holmes has inserted extracts from this version in
his edition of the Septuagint, 2
SECTION III.
ON THE ANTIENT ORIENTAL VERSIONS OF THE OLD AND.NEtV
TESTAMENTS.
I. SYRIAC VERSIONS, 1. Peschito or Literal Version. 2. Philoxcnian
Version. 3. Syro-Estrangelo, and Paltcstino- Syriac Version* II.
EGYPTIAN VERSIONS. Coptic, Sahidic, Am mo titan, and J3nstnuric.
III. ETHIOPIC VERSION. IV. ARABIC VERSIONS. V. ARMENIAN-
VERSION. VI. PERSIC VERSIONS.
I. SYRIAC VERSIONS. Syria being visited at a very early period
by the preachers of the Christian faith, several translations of the sa-
cred volume were made into the language of that country.
1. The most celebrated of these is the PESCHITO or
sio SIMPLEX), as it is usually called, on account of its very close
adherence to the Hebrew and Greek texts, from which it was im-
mediately made. The most extravagant assertions have been ad-
vanced concerning its antiquity ; some referring the translation of
the Old Testament to the time of Solomon and Hiram, while others
ascribe it to Asa, priest of the Samaritans, and a third class to the
apostle Thaddeus. This last tradition is received by the Syrian
churches; but a more recent date is ascribed to it by modern bibli-
cal philologers. Bishop Walton, Carpzov, Leusden/Bishop Lowth,
and Dr. Kennicott, fix its date to the first century ; Bauer and some
other German critics, to the second or third century ; Jahn fixes it,
at the latest, to the second century ; De Rossi pronounces it to bo
very antient, but does not specify any precise, date. The most pro-
i British Critic, O. S. vol. viii. p. 259.
* The preceding account of antient Greek versions is drawn from Carpzov, Critica
Sacra; pp, 552574. ; Bauer, Critica Sacra, pp. 273 2SS. ; Morus, Acroases Hcnnc-
neuticaj, torn. ii. pp.120 147.; Bishop Walton, Prolegom. c. ix. 19, pp.385 387,;
Jahn, Introductio in Libros Sacros Veteris Foederis, pp. 6670. ; and Masch's edition of
Lelong's Bibliotheca Sacra, partii. vol. ii. sect.i. pp. 220229. Montfaucon, Pro4.
Diss. ad Origenis Hexapla, torn. i. pp. 4673. In the fourth volume of the Commcn-
tationes Theologies?, (pp, 195263.) edited by MM. Velthusen, Kuinoel, and ttupertf,
there is a specimen of a Clavis Eeliquiarum Versionum Grcecarum, V. T. by John Fre-
deric Fischer: it contains only the letter A. A specimen of a new Lexicon to the antient
Greek interpreters, and also to the apocryphal books of the Old Testament, so constructed
as to serve as a Lexicon to the New Testament, was also lately published by M. E. G. A.
Bockel, at Leipsic, intitled Nova Clavis in Gr&cas Interprets Veteris Testament^ Scrip,
taresque Apocrypha*, ita adornatCB ut etiam Lexici in Wovi Fcederis Libras iisum pr&lere
possit, atque editwnis fas interprctum kexaptoris, specimina, 4to. 1820, Cappel, in his
' Critica Sacra, has given a copious account, with very numerous examples, of the various
lections that may be obtained by collating the Septuagint with the Hebrew (lib. iv,
pp. 4917660' an <* ^ collating the Hebrew text with the Chaldee paraphrases and
the antient Greek versions (lib, v. cc. 1 6. pp. 707844.)^ torn. ii. cd. ScharOnber*.
II. Sect. III.] Syriac Versions. 57
bable opinion is that of Michaelis 1 , who ascribes the Syriac version
of both Testaments to the close of the first, or to the earlier part of
the second century, at which time the Syrian churches flourished
most, and the Christians at Edessa had a temple for divine worship
erected after the model of that at Jerusalem : and it is not to be sup-
posed that they would be without a version of the Old Testament,
the reading of which had been introduced by the apostles. The
Syriac version of the New Testament certainly must have been exe-
cuted previously to the third century, because the text which it fol-
lows, according to Professor Hug, does not harmonise with the
recension adopted by the churches of Palestine and Syria, subse-
quently to the third century. 2 It is independent, it belongs to no
family, and sometimes presents the aiatient and peculiar readings
of the Vetm Itala^ or Old Italic version, or those occurring in the
Codex Cantabrigiensis.
The Old Testament was evidently translated from the Original
Hebrew, to which it most closely and literally adheres, with the ex-
ception of a few passages which appear to bear some affinity to the
Septuagint : Jahn accounts for this by supposing, either that this
version was consulted by the Syriac translator or translators, or that
the Syrians afterwards corrected their translation by the Septuagint.
Leusden conjectures, that the translator did not make use of the
most correct Hebrew manuscripts, and has given some examples
which appear to support his opinion. Dathe, however, speaks most
positively in favour of its antiquity and fidelity, and refers to the
Syriac version, as a certain standard by which we may judge of the
state of the Hebrew text in the second century: and both Dr. Kennicott
and Professor De Rossi have derived many valuable readings from this
version. De Rossi, indeed, prefers it to all the other antient ver-
sions, and says, that it closely follows the order of the sacred text,
rendering word for word, and is more pure than any other. As it is
therefore probable that the Syriac version was made about the end
of the first century, it might be made from Hebrew MSS. almost as
old as those which were before transcribed into Greek, and from
MSS. which might be in some places true where the others werecor-
ru'pted. And it will be no wonder at all, if a version so very antient
should have preserved a 'great variety of true readings, where the
Hebrew manuscripts were corrupted afterwards. Dr. Boothroyd
considers this version to be as antient, and in many respects as valu-
able, as the Chaldee Paraphrase 3 : and in the notes to his edition of
the Hebrew Bible he was shown that this version has retained nu-
merous and important various readings. To its general fidelity
almost every critic 'of note bears unqualified approbation, although it
1 Iiitrod. to New. Test, vol. ii. part, i, pp, 29 38, Bishop Marsh, however, in his
notes, has controverted the arguments of Michaelis, (ibid, part, ii, pp, 551 554.) which
have been rendered highly probable by the Rt. Rev. Dr. Laurence, (Dissertation upon
the Logos, pp. 67 75.) who has examined and refuted the Bishop of Peterborough's
objections.
ft Hug's Introcl. to the New Test vol. i. pp. 357 SiTO, CflK'rier, In I roil, an Nouv-
Teat. p. 175.
1 IJibliu Hebraica, vol. i> Pref. pp. xv. xvi.
58 Antient Versions of the Old and New Testaments. [Part I. Ch.
is not every where equal : and it is remarkably clear and strong in
those passages which attribute characters of Deity to the Messiah.
Jahn observes, that a different method of interpretation is adopted
in the Pentateuch from that which 1 is to be found in the Book of
Chronicles; and that there are some Chaldee words in the first chap-
ter of Genesis, and also in the Book of Ecclesiastes and the Song of
Solomon : whence he infers that this version was the work not of
one, but of several authors. The arguments prefixed to the Psalms
were manifestly written by a Christian author. x The Syriac version
of the New Testament comprises only the four Gospels, the Acts of
the Apostles, the Epistles of Saint Paul (including the Epistle^to the
Hebrews), the first Epistle of Saint John, Saint Peter's first Epistle,,
and the Epistle of Saint James. The celebrated passage in 1 John
v. 7., and the history of the woman taken in adultery (John viii.
2 11 Os are both wanting. All the Christian sects in Syria and
the East make use of this version exclusively, which they hold in the
highest estimation. Michaelis pronounces it to be the very best
translation of the Greek Testament which he ever read, for the gene-
ral ease, elegance, and fidelity with which it has been executed. It
retains,* however* many Greek words, which might have been easily
and correctly expressed in Syriac : in Matt, xxvii. alone there are
not fewer than eleven words. In like manner some Latin words
have been retained which the authors of the New Testament had
borrowed from the Roman manners and customs. This version also
presents some mistakes, which can only be explained by the words
of the Greek text, from which it was immediately made. For instance,
in rendering into Syriac these words of Acts xviii. 7., ONOMATI
IOTSTOT 2EBOMENOT, the interpreter has translated Titus in-
stead of Justus, because he had divided the Greek in the following
manner ONOMA TIIOTS TOT SEBOMENOT. 2
An important accession to biblical literature was made, a few years
since, by the late Rev. Dr. Buchanan, to whose assiduous labours
the British church in India is hiost deeply indebted ; and who, in
his progress among the Syrian churches and Jews of India, dis-
covered and obtained numerous antient manuscripts of the Scrip-
tures, which are now deposited in the public library at Cambridge-
One of these, which was discovered in a remote Syrian church near
the mountains, is particularly valuable : it contains the Old and New
Testaments, engrossed with beautiful accuracy in the Estrangelo (or
old Syriac) character, on strong vellum, in large folio, and having
three columns in a page. The words of every book are numbered ;
and the volume is illuminated, but not after the European manner,
the initial letters having no ornament. Though somewhat injured by
L Carpzov, Critica Sacra, pp.623 626.-; Lcusden, Philologus Hebrseo.Mixtus, pp.G7*
71. ; Bishop Lowth's Isaiah, vol.i. p. xci. ; t)r. Kennicott 3 Diss. ii. p. 355. ; Bauer,
Critica Sacra, pp. 308320. ; Jahn, Introd. ad Vet. Feed. pp. 75, 76. ; De Rossi, Vorlas
Lectiones ad Vet. Test. torn. i. prol. p. xxxii. ; Datke, Opuwula ad Crisin et Interprc-
tationem, Vet. Test, p. 171,.; Kortholt, do Versionibus Scripture, pp. 40 45,; Walton,
Proleg. c. 13, pp.593, et seq. Dr. Smith's Srrinfuro Testimony of the Messiah, vol. I.
pp. 396, 397.
Hug's Ifltrbd. vol. i. pp. 342, 343.
II, Sect. III.] Syriac Versions. 59
time or neglect, the ink being in certain places obliterated, still the
letters can in general be distinctly traced from the impress of the pen,
or from the partial corrosion of the ink. The' Syrian church assigns
a high date to this manuscript, which, in the opinion of Mr. Yeates,
who has published a collation of the Pentateuch 1 , was written about
the seventh century. In looking over this manuscript, Dr. Buchanan
found the very first emendation of the Hebrew text proposed by Dr.
Kennicolt - 9 which doubtless is the true reading.
The first edition of the Syriac version of the Old Testament ap-
peared in the Paris Polyglott; but, being taken from an imperfect MS.,
its deficiencies were supplied by Gabriel Sionita, who translated i he pas-
sages wanting from the Latin Vulgate, and has been unjustly charged
with having translated the whole from the Vulgate. This text was
reprinted in Bishop Walton's Polyglott, with the addition of some
apocryphal books. There have been numerous editions of particular
parts of the Syriac Old Testament, which are minutely described by
Masch. 3 The principal editions of the Syriac Scriptures are noticed
infra, in the Appendix, pp. 40, 41.
The Peschito Syriac version of the New Testament was first made
known in Europe by Moses of Marclin, who had been sent by Igna-
tius, patriarch of the Maronite Christians, in ] 552, to Pope JuliusIIL,
to acknowledge the papal supremacy in the name of the Syrian
church, and was at the same .time commissioned to procure the
Syriac New Testament. This was accomplished at Vienna in J555,
under the editorial care of Moses and Albert Widmanstad, with the
assistance of William Postell, and at the expense of the emperor Fer-
dinand I. This Editio Princeps is in quarto. The Syriac New Tes-
tament has since been printed several times.
There is also extant a Syriac version of the second Epistle of
Saint Peter, the second and third Epistles of John, the Epistle of
Jude, and the Apocalypse, which are wanting in the Peschito: these
are by some writers ascribed to Mar Abba, primate of the East,
between the years 535 and 552. The translation of these books
is made from the original Greek ; but the author, whoever he was,
possessed but an indifferent knowledge of the two languages.
2. The PHILOXENIAN or SYRO-PHILOXENIAN Version derives its
name from Philoxeims, or Xenayas, Bishop of Hierapolis or Mabug
in Syria, A. D.48S 518, who employed his rural bishop (Chorepis*
cojius) Polycarp, to translate the Greek New Testament into Syriac.
This version was finished in the year 508, and was afterwards re-
vised by Thomas of Harkel or Heraclea, A. D. 616. Michaelis is
of opinion, that there was a third edition? and a fourth is attributed
In thu Christian Observer, vol. xii. pp. 171174. there is an account of Mr. Yeates's
. (edit. 18110 ,
Gen, iv, 8. And Cttin said wito Abel his brother. Let its go down into the plain. It
jnay be satisfactory to the reader to know, that this disputed addition is to be found in the
Samaritan, Syriac, Suptuagint, and Vulgate Versions, printed m Bishop Walton 'ti Poly-
glott.
a Bibl. Sacr, pavtii. vol. i. sect, iv, pp. G4 71.
60 Antient Persians of the Old and New Testaments. [Part I. Ch.
to Dionysius Barsalibeeus, who was bishop of Amida from 1166 to
1177. It appears, however, that there were only two editions
the original one by Polycarp, and that revised by Thomas of Har-
kel; the single copy of the Four Gospels, with the alterations of
Barsalibseus, in the twelfth century, being hardly intitlecl to the
name of a new edition. This version was not known in Europe
until the middle of the eighteenth century; when the Rev. Dr.
Gloucester Ridley published a Dissertation on the Syriac Versions
of the New Testament (in 1761), three manuscripts of which he had
received thirty years before from Amida in Mesopotamia. Though
age and growing infirmities, the great expense of printing, and the
want of a patron, prevented Dr. Ridley from availing himself of these
manuscripts; yet having, under circumstances of peculiar difficulty,
succeeded in acquiring a knowledge of the Syriac language, he
employed himself at intervals in making a transcript of the Four
Gospels. These, being put into the hands of the late Professor
White, were published by him with a literal Latin translation, in
1778, in two volumes 4to., at the expense of the delegates of the
Clarendon press at Oxford. In 1779, Professor White published
from the same press the Acts of the Apostles and the Catholic
Epistles, and in ] 804, the Epistles of Saint Paul, also in 4to, and
accompanied with a Latin translation.
The Philoxenian version, though made immediately from the
Greek, is greatly inferior to the Peschito, both in the accuracy
with which it is executed, and also in its style. It is, however, not
devoid of value, " and is of real importance to a critic, whose object
is to select a variety of readings, with the view of restoring the ge-
nuine text of the Greek original: for he may be fully assured, that
every phrase and expression is a precise copy of the Greek text as it
stood in the manuscript from which the version was made. But, as it
is not prior to the sixth century, and the Peschito was written either at
the end of the first, or at the beginning of the second century, it is of less
importance to know the readings of the Greek manuscript thatwas used
in the former, than those of the original employed in the latter." *
3. Of the OTHEH SYRIAC VERSIONS, the Syro-Estrangelo version
of the Old Testament^ and the PalsBstino- Syriac version of part of the
New Testament, are of sufficient importance to deserve a brief notice.
[i.] The SYRO-ESTRANGELO version is a translation of Origcii's
Hexaplar edition of the Greek Septuagint : it was executed in the
former part of the seventh century, and its author is unknown. The
late Professor De Rossi, who published the first specimen of it' 2
does not decide whether it is to be attributed to Mar- Abba, James
i Michaelis's Introduction to the New Testament, vol. ii. parti, p. 68. To Bish^Marsli's
Notes, ibid. part, ii, pp. 533585. we are chiefly indebted for the preceding account of
the Syriac Versions of the New Testament. See also Hug's Introduction, vol. i. pp. 373
386. Dr. G. H. Bernstein's Dissertation on Thomas of Harkel's revision of the
Syro-Plriloxenian Version, imitled De Vcrsione Novi Testament! Syriac Heracleensi
Commentatio. Lipsiae, 1 S2S, 4to.
Arobrosiano, unde illud hau&tum cat, prwiuisit Johannes Bern, llosj-i. Svo, Parma 1 , 177fc.
I. Se^t. III.] Egyptian Versions. 61
of Edessa, Paul Bishop of Tela, or to Thomas of Heraclea. Asse-
manni, ascribes it to Thomas, though other learned men affirm that
he did no more than collate the Books of Scripture. This version,
however, corresponds exactly with the text of the Septuagint, espe-
cially in those passages in which the latter differs from the Hebrew.
A MS. of this version is in the Ambrosian Library at Milan, com-
prising the Books of Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of
Solomon, Wisdom, Ecclesitisticus, Hosea, Amos, Habakkuk, Ze-
phaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Jeremiah, Daniel, and Isaiah :
it also contains the obelus and other marks of Origen's Hexapla; and a
subscription at the end states it to have been literally translated from
the Greek cop}', corrected by Eusebius himself, with the assistance
of Pamphilus, from the books of Origen, which were deposited in
the library at Csesarea. The conformity of this MS. with the ac-
count given by Masius, in the preface to his learned Annotations on
the Book of Joshua, affords strong grounds for believing that this is
the second part of the MS. described by him as then being in his
possession, and which, there is reason to fear, is irrecoverably lost*
From this version M, Norberg edited the prophecies of Jeremiah
and Ezekiel in 1787, 4to. Londini, Gothorum ; and M. Bugati, the
Book of Daniel, at Milan, 1788, to. 1
[ii.] The FAL^ESTINO-SYIUAC, or SYRFAC TRANSLATION OF JE-
RUSALEM, was discovered in the Vatican Library at Rome by M.
Adler, in a manuscript of the eleventh century. It is not an entire
translation of the New Testament, but only a Lectionarium, or col-
lection of detached portions, appointed to be read in the services of
the church on Sundays and festival days. It is written in the Syriac
or Chaldee dialect of Jerusalem, and was evidently made in a Roman
province : for in Matt, xxvii. 27- the word o-rgomcvra;, soldiers^ is ren-
dered by N'ZDn (RoMiA), as if the translator had never heard of any
soldiers but Romans ; and in the same verse enrs/g, land or cohort,
is rendered by the Latin word castra, K~lDDp- These and other
indications afford reason to think, that the manuscript contains a
translation made from the Greek, in Palestine ; it was written at An-
tioch, and from all these circumstances, this version has been deno-
minated the Jerusalem-Syriac Version. This manuscript has not
yet been collated throughout, so that it is very uncertain to what re-
cension it belongs, But, from what is known concerning it, there is
reason to think "that it combines the readings of different families. 2
II. EGYPTIAN VERSIONS. From the proximity of Egypt to
Juclsca, it appears that the knowledge of the Gospel was very early
The specimen consists of the first psalm printed in six columns. The first contains the
Greek text of the Scptuagint ; the .second, the Syro-Estrangelo text; the third, the Latin
text translated from the Septuagint; the fourth, the Hebrew text; the fifth, the Peschito
or old Syriac text above noticed ; and the sixth, the Latin text translated from this latter
version*
J Masch, part. ii. vol. i. pp 58 60. Jahn, Introd. ad Vet. Feed, pp.76 78. Monthly
Review, 0. S. vol. lix. pp. 452454. Some other Syriac versions of less note arc de-
scribed by Masch, ut supra, pp. (JO 62.
a CelleMor, Introd. auNouv, Test. pp. ISO, I8L Hug's Introduction, vol. i. pp.386
389. A notice of the principal editions of the Syriac Version is given in the Appendix,
pp. 40,41.
62 Antlent Versions of the Old and Ne^ Testaments. [Part I. Ch.
communicated to the inhabitants of that country, whose language was
divided into three dialects iheCoptiC) or dialect of Lower Egypt; the
Sahidic, or dialect of Upper Egypt; and the Basmuric, or dialect of
Middle Egypt
The COPTIC language is a compound of the old Egyptian and
Greek ; into which the Old Testament was translated from the Sep-
tuagint, perhaps in the second or third century, and certainly before
the seventh century. Of this version, the Pentateuch was published
by Wilkins in 1731 ; and a Psalter, by the congregation de Propa-
ganda Fide, at Rome, in 1744 and 1749. J
In the SAHIDIC language the ninth chapter of Daniel was pub-
lished by Miinter at Rome in 1786; and Jeremiah, ch.ix. 17. to
ch. xiii.j by Mingarelli, in Reliquiae Egyptiorum Codicum in BiUio-
theca Naniana asservattf, at Bologna, in 1785. The late Dr. Woide
was of opinion that both the Coptic and Sahidic versions were made
from the Greek. They express the phrases of the Septuagint ver-
sion ; and most of the additions, omissions, arid transpositions, which
distinguished the latter from the Hebrew, are discoverable in the
Coptic and Sahidic versions.
The Coptic version of the New Testament was published at Oxford
in 1716, in 4>to. 9 by Daniel Wilkins, a learned Prussian, who has en-
deavoured to prove that it must have been executed prior to the
third century; but his opinion has been controverted by many
learned men, and particularly by Louis Picques, who refers it to
the fifth century. Professor Hug, however, has shown that it could
not have been composed before the time of Hesychius, nor before
the middle of the third century. 2 The celebrated passage (1 John
v. 7.) is wanting in this version, as well as in the Syriac-Peschito,
and Philoxenian translations. From the observations"of Dr. Woide,
it appears that the Coptic inclines more to the Alexandrian than the
Sahidic that no remarkable coincidence is to be found between
the Coptic or Sahidic and the Vulgate, and that we have no reason
to suspect that the former has been altered or made to conform to
the latter.
Concerning the age of the Sahidic version, critics are not yet
agreed. Dr. Woide, however, has shown that it was most probably
executed in the second century ; and, consequently, it is of the utmost
importance to the criticism of the Greek Testament. In a dissert-
ation on this version, written in the German language, and abridged
by Bishop Marsh 3 , Dr. W. observes, that there are now in exist-
ence two Sahidic manuscripts, one formerly in the possession of
the late Dr. Askew, the other brought from Egypt by the celebrated
traveller, Mr. Bruce. The former contains a work, intitlecl Sophia,
and written by Valentinus, in the second century. This manuscript
contains various passages both from the Old and New Testament,
which coincide with the fragments of the Sahidic version now extant ;
* Masch, part.ii. vol. i. pp. 182190. Jahn, p. 81- The only perfect copy of the
Coptic Bible now in Europe i* said to be in the possession- of Monsieur Marcel, See
M. Quatremere's Recherches sur la Langueet la LitteYature d'Egypte, p. 118.
" Hug's Introd. vol. i. p. 410.
* Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. part ii. pp, 595^ 596.
II. Sect IIL] Tlie Ethiopia or Abyssinian Version. 63
whence it is concluded that a Sahidic version of the whole Bible not
only existed so early as the beginning of the second century, but
that it was the same as that of which we have various fragments, and
which, if put together, would form perhaps a complete Sahidic ver-
sion of the Bible. The other manuscript to which Dr. Woide ap-
peals, contains two books, the one intitled BipXo$ r^ yvw<reo$ 9 the
other, Bi/SAof Aoyou xara pvo-rygtov. Now that this was written by
a Gnostic, as well as the other manuscript, appears both from the
title and the contents, and therefore it is concluded that the author
lived in the second century. And as various passages are quoted
in it both from the Old and New Testament, Dr. Woide deduces
the same inference as from the foregoing. Of this version some frag-
ments of the Gospels of Matthew and John have been published
by Mingarelli, in a work intitled Mgyptiomm Codicum Reliquiae, Ve-
netiis in Bibliothecd Naniand asservatte. (Bononise, 1715, 4to.) But
the completest collection of fragments f this version is that prepared
for the press by the late Dr. Woide, who did not live to publish
them. The work was completed and edited by the Rev. Dr. Ford,
from the Clarendon press, at Oxford, in folio, 1799, as an appendix,
to Dr. W.'s fac-simile of the Codex Alexandrinus.
From the difference of their readings, and from the circumstance
that additions in the one are omitted in the other, .Bishop Marsh
infers that the Coptic and Sahidic are independent versions, both
made from the original Greek. Both, therefore, may be quoted as
separate evidence for a reading in the Greek Testament *
Besides the versions in the Coptic and Sahidic dialects, Father
Georgi discovered, in a manuscript belonging to Cardinal Borgia,
some fragments of a version written in a still different Egyptian dia-
lect, which he calls the AMMONIAN DIALECT. It contains only 1 Con
vii. 36. ix. 16. and xiv. S3. xv. 33. Some fragments of a BAS-
MURico-CopTic Version of the Old and New Testament, discovered
in the Borgian Museum at Velitri, were published by ML Engelbreth
at Copenhagen, in 1816. Dr. Frederick Munter has printed the
Sahidic and Ammoniac texts of 1 Cor. ix. 1016. in his Commentatio
de Indole Versionis Novi Testamenti Sahidica (4to. Hafnise, 1789), in
parallel columns, in order to present the reader with a distinct view of
the similarity or difference between the two versions. On account,
however, of the chief difference consisting in the orthography of single
words, he is not disposed to assign to the Ammoniac the name of a
separate dialect. On considering the region where this dialect seemed
to be vernacular, he was inclined for several reasons to fix upon the
Oases, particularly the Ammonian Oasis, whence he called it the Am-
monian Dialect: but Professor Hug, who- has investigated the
hypothesis of various learned men, is of opinion that the fragments in
question may possibly exhibit the idiom of Middle Egypt. This
version was probably executed in the latter part of the third century. 2
IIL The ETHIOPIC or ABYSSINIAN VERSION of the Old Testa-
ment was made from the Septuagint : although its author and date are
1 Marsh's Micbaelis, vol. ii. parti, pp. 76 81. partii. pp.586 597.
2 Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 417423, For a notice of the editions or pub-
lished fragments of the several Egyptian versions, see the Appendix to this volume, p. 43.
64< Anllcnt Versions of the Old a?td Net Testaments. [Part I. Ch.
unknown, 5 Tet ? fr ra tne marks of unquestionable antiquity which it
bears, there is every reason to believe that it was executed in the
fourth century. Some peculiar readings occur in this translation :
but, where it seems to be exact, it derives considerable authority
from its antiquity. Only a few books and fragments of this version
have been printed. The first portions of the Ethiopic Scriptures
that appeared in print, were the Psalms, and the Song of Solomon :
edited at Rome, by John Potken, A. D. 1,513. The translation of
the New Testament is supposed to have been made by Frumentius,,
who, about the year 330, first preached Christianity in Ethiopia. In
1548, the New Testament was printed at Rome by some Abyssinian
priests, and was afterwards reprinted in the London Polyglott : but
as the manuscripts used in the Roman edition were old and muti-
lated, the editors restored such chasms as appeared in the text, by
translations from the Latin Vulgate. These editions, therefore, are
not of much value, as they do not present faithful copies of the
antient Ethiopic text ; which, according to Professor Hug, exhibits
the appearance either of several versions being united in one copy,
or of several MSS. (belonging to different recensions) being quoted
in the composition of this version. 1
There is, however,, reason to expect that, in no long time, the gift
of the entire Ethiopic Scriptures will be imparted to Abyssinia. A
manuscript copy of this version, in fine preservation, has been pur-
chased by the committee of the Church Missionary Society. From
a memoir on this manuscript by Professor Lee, we learn, that it
contains the first eight books of the Old Testament, written on
vellum, in a bold and masterly hand, in two columns on each page.
The length of the page is that of a large quarto: the width is not
quite so great. The volume contains 285 folios, of which the text
covers 282, very accurately written, and in high preservation. On
the first page is written, in Ethiopic, the invocation usually found in
the books of the eastern Christians : " In the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Then follows an account
of the contents of the book, written in Latin by some former pos-
sessor, and a date A.I). 1596, 20th September. On the reverse of
the first folio is found a table, not unlike the tables of genealogy in
some of our old English Bibles, which seems to be intended to show
the hours appointed for certain prayers. Then follows the Book of 1
Genesis, as translated from the Greek of the Septuagint. On the
reverse of the third folio is the following inscription in Arabic :
"The poor Ribea, the Son of Elias, wrote it: O wine! to which
nothing can be assimilated, either in reality or appearance : O ex-
cellent drink ! of which our Lord said, having the cup in his hand,
and giving thanks, c This is my blood for the salvation of men.' "
Folios 7. & 8. have been supplied, in paper, by a more modern hand.
On the reverse of folio 8, is a very humble attempt at drawing, in the
ij p. 81. Masch, partii. vol. i. pp. 140 143. Michaelis, vol. ii. pp.95 _ 98.
610614. Hug, vol. i. pp, 426 428. Walton, ProL xv. 1012. pp. 679685.
Kortholt, pp. 298301. In Mr. Bruce's Travels, vol. ii. pp. 416420. (8vo. edit.)
there is an interesting account of the Ethiopic biblical books. It is not known in whose
possession the manuscript copy of the Ethiopic version now is, which was brought by
Mr. B, from Abyssinia. *
II. Sect. III.] The Ethiopia or Abyssinian Version. 65
figure of a person apparently in prayer, accompanied by an inscrip-
tion in Ethiopic, at the side of the figure : " In the prayers of
Moses and Aaron, to l Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, am I 3 thy ser-
vant, O Lord, presented in the power of the Trinity, a weak, infirm,
and defiled sinner. Let them implore Christ/' Under the drawing,
in Ethiopic : " In the same manner, every slayer that slays Cain,
will I repay in this ; and, as he slew, so shall he be slain." . On the
reverse of folio 98., at the end of the Book of Exodus, are two figures,
somewhat similar, but rather better drawn, and seemingly by the writer
of the manuscript ; and, in another place or two, there are marginal or-
naments. At the end of Deuteronomy is this inscription, in Ethiopic:
" The repetition of the law, which God spake to Moses. Numbered
5070 2 (words). Intercede for your slave Isaac," At the end of the
volume : " Pray for those who laboured in this book ,- and for your
slave Isaac, who gave this to Jerusalem, the Holy." Then follows
an inscription, in Arabic : " In the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost, one God. O Lord, save thy ; people
from every evil ! O our God, Jesus Christ, the speaker to men ! O
holy people, remember your slave Isaac, the poor : God shall re-
member you in the mercies of this book. Pray, if God be willing,
that I may be permitted to see your face. And pray for me, the
sinner. Pardon my sins, O Lord ! and let my body be buried in
Mount Sion." Then follows^ in Ethiopic : " That our enemies may
not say of us, c We have conquered them :' be ye prudent. We
have given you a lamp. Be ye the culture. Sow ye the flock:
reap and rejoice." A few lines have been erased. Then follows
.... " me, Isaac, the poor, in your prayers. It was completed in
Beth Gabbaza, of Axuma. In thy name, O Lord, have I planted,
that thou place me not in any other place except Mount Sion ; the
mount of Christ ; the house of Christians. Let them not be forgotten
in your prayers, who have read and testified to you. Preserve, O
Lord, this my offering for me thy servant, the poor; and preserve
all these books which I offer, that the brethren, dwelling at, Jeru-
salem, may be comforted. And pray for me 3 , forget me not in the
holy offices, and in prayer, that we may all stand before God in the
terrible day and hours. That it might not be written that we
were wanting, I have previously sent and -given you this for the
warfare of the testimony. Intercede, and bless. And also for the
refreshing of the record of the Fathers : and also for Cueskam*, the
i As this inscription, which occurs on the supplied leaves, savours of the errors^ of the
Romish Church, it was probably written by some Abyssinian Catholic. The inscriptions of
Isaac, the writer of the MS-, though mutilated, and sometimes obscure, seem free from
these errors. The figure of St. Peter, mentioned below, was probably traced by the same
a It is customary among the Jews, Syrians, and Ethiopians, to number the words in the
books of Scripture. . *
3 Iti most of the eastern churches, it is the practice to enumerate their Saints, in a
certain part of the Liturgy, .
4 The name of a region, a sea, and a mountain, in Ethiopia; so celebrated, as to be
esteemed by the Ethiopians as preferable to even Sinai or Mount Olivet ; and, as tradition
VOL. II. ff
66 Antient Persians of the Old and New Testaments. Part I. Ch.
queen of the sons of Abyssinia ; that they may be comforted, and
thence convert our region may, moreover, migrate into other
regions, and restore Jerusalem; and for the Calvary of Mary.
Let them pray for me. Let it be preserved as the widow's mite, for
ever and ever. Let them not sell or exchange ; nor let them carry
it away ; nor let them cause it to be placed elsewhere. And ..... "
the rest is wanting. Hence it appears, that the book was written at
Axuma, the antient capital of Ethiopia; and that it was sent by
Isaac to the Abyssinians residing in Jerusalem. No date appears in
the manuscript itself. It is, probably, about 300 years old. On the
reverse of fol. 285. is a drawing, intended to represent Andrew the
Apostle, with the book of the Gospels in one hand, and the keys
in the other. Some less ingenious draftsman, however, has, by means
of the transparency of the vellum, traced out this figure on the first
page of this folio, and given the name of Peter to his humble repre-
sentation, He has thus succeeded in assigning to St. Peter the'
first place, and also in bestowing on him the keys. Against this
picture of Peter is placed his age, 120 years.
The following fac-sinjile represents part of the remarkable pro-
phecy of Balaam. x
Num. XXIV. 17.
fiays, whither Joseph and Mary, with the child Jesus, betook themselves, making it their
residence for some time, after the flight into Egypt, CasteU> sub voce __ Ludolf, sub voce
sap it is the name of a monastery in Upper Egypt, which was always had in great venerl
ation by the Copts and Ethiopians; and where Christ is said to have resided with his
mother, when he fled from Herod.
Eighteenth Report of the Church Missionary Society, pp. 188, 189. fn p. 190, there
II. Sect. III.] Arabic Visions. 67
I shall see him, but not now : I shall call Mm blessed, but he is not
near : there shall arise a star out of Jacob, and from Israel shall it
arise ; and he shall destroy the ambassadors of Moab, and shall take
captive all the children of Set h.
This precious manuscript has been carefully transcribed, and is now
printing with a fount of types, cast at the expense of the British and
Foreign Bible Society, from the matrices (preserved at Frankfort) of
the celebrated Ethiopic scholar John Ludolph,- whose types, as used
in his printed works, have been highly approved by the Abyssinians, *
IV. ARABIC VERSIONS. Although the Christian religion was
preached in Arabia, as well as in other countries of the East, at an
early period, yet it never was the established religion of the country,
as in Syria and Egypt ; for even the temple at Mecca was a heathen
temple "till the time of Mohammed; Historical evidence, therefore,
concerning the Arabic versions of the Old Testament, does not ex-
tend beyond the tenth century, when
1* Rabbi Saadias Gaon, a celebrated Jewish teacher at Babylon,
translated, or rather paraphrased, the Old Testament into Arabic :
of this version the Pentateuch was printed at Constantinople, in folio,
in the year 1546, in Hebrew characters; and in the Paris and Lon-
don Polyglotts, in Arabic letters. The prophecy of Isaiah was pub-
lished by Paulus in 8vo. at Jena, in 1790, 1791. The remaining
books of this translation have not hitherto been discovered. Besides
this, there are several other Arabic versions extant, made immediately
from the Hebrew, either by Jews, Samaritans, or Christians, of which
the following are the principal, viz.
2. The Arabic version of the Pentateuch, published by Erpenius
at Leyden in 1622, 4to., appears to have been executed in the thir-
teenth century by some African Jew, who has very closely adhered
to the Hebrew,
3. The Arabic version of the Book of Joshua, printed in the Paris
and London Polyglotts, is, in the opinion of Bauer, made directly
from the Hebrew. Its author and date are not known.
4. The Pentateuch, Psalms, and Prophecy of Daniel, were trans-
lated by Saadia Ben Levi Asnekot, who lived in the early part of the
seventeenth century : they are extant only in MS. in the British Mu-
seum 2 , and are of very little value.
Besides these versions, the Arab Christians have a translation of
the Book of Job (printed in the Paris and London Polyglotts), and
two versions of the Psalms, still in MS,, which were respectively made
from the Peschito or Old Syriac version, All the Arabic books of
the Old Testament (with the exception of the Pentateuch and Job),
which are printed in those Polyglotts, were executed from Hesy-
is an interesting notice of the Ethiopic MSS, of the Scriptures, in the Royal Library at
Paris.
i For a notice of such parts of the Ethiopic Version of the Scriptures as have been
printed, see the Appendix to this volume, p. 44. ; and for other particulars relative to this
Version, the reader is referred to Mr. Platt's Catalogue of the Ethiopic Biblical Manu-
scripts in the Royal Library of Paris, and in the Library of the British and Foreign Bible
Society/* &c. London, 1823. 4to.
a Cat. Harl, MSS. vol. iii. num. 5505.
* 2
68 Antient Versions of the Old and New Testaments. [Part L Cb.
chius's recension of the Septuagint. The Psalms, inserted in Jus-
tirnani's Polyglott Psalter, and Gabriel Sionita's Arabic Psalter,
were made from Lucian's recension of that version : and the Arabic
Psalter, printed at Aleppo in 1 706, 4to. 5 follows the Melchitic J re-
cension of the Lxx. 2
There are many Arabic translations of the New Testament, be-
sides those which have appeared in print : for since the Arabic lan-
guage supplanted the Syriac and Egyptian, the inhabitants of tiie
countries where these had been spoken, have been obliged to annex
Arabic translations to the antient versions, which are no longer un-
derstood. These Arabic translations are supposed to have been
made at different times between the seventh and the eleventh cen-
turies : in general they were not all executed from the original text,
but from the versions which they were intended to accompany. Thus
some which are placed together with the Greek text 5 have been made
from the Greek, while others have been made from the Syriac, the
Coptic, and even from the Latin Vulgate. 3
V. The ARMENIAN VERSION of the Old Testament was made from
the Alexandrian Septuagint: its author was Miesrob, who invented
letters fully expressive of the Armenian tongue, towards the close of
the fourth or early in the fifth century. It is said to have been sub-
sequently altered according to the Peschito or old Syriac version,
and according to the Latin Vulgate, by Uscan, an Armenian bishop,
who was specially sent to Amsterdam to superintend the edition there
printed in 1666. The translation of the New Testament is ascribed
jointly to Miesrob, and to the patriarch Isaac, at the end of the fourth
or early in the fifth century. It was twice translated from the Syriac,,
and then from the Greek \ and that the copies now extant were made
from the latter language, is evident from their containing those books
of the New Testament which were never admitted into the Peschito
or antient literal Syriac version. This version, in the opinion of
Semler 3 is of great importance, as faithfully representing the Greek
MSS. whence it was made : but Michaelis observes, that it would be
an inestimable treasure, had it descended to us unaltered by time and
superstition. It has in several instances been made conformable to
the Vulgate by Haitho or Hethom, sovereign of the Lesser Armenia
from A.D. 1224- to 1270, who was attached to the Church of Rome,
and skilled in the Latin language. 4
1 The Melcldtes were those Christians in Syria, Egypt, and the Levant, who, though
not Greeks, followed the doctrines and ceremonies of the Greek Church. They were
called Melchites, that is, Royalists, by their adversaries, by way of reproach, on account of
their implicit submission to the edict of the emperor Marcian, in favour of the council of
Chalcedon. Moshcim's Eccl. Hist. vol. ii. p, 188. note (m).
2 Carpzov. Crit. Sacr. pp. 640 644. Bauer, Grit. Sacr. pp. 321 324. Jahn, Introd.
ad Vet. Feed. pp. 78 80. Masch, partii. vol. i. pp 103 110.
3 Michaelis (vol. ii. parti, pp. SI 95.) and Hug (vol. i. pp. 430 454.) have gone
fully into the history of the Arabic versions. For a notice of the principal editions of
them, see the Appendix to this volume, pp, 41, 42.
4 Jahn, p. 8 a. Masch, pp, 169 173.; Kortholt, pp. 304, 305. On the present
state of the Armenian church in India, see Dr. Buchanan's " Christian Researches,"
pp. 341 346. Semlcr, Apparatus ad Liberalern Novi Testament! Interpretationem,
p. 69. Michaelis, vol. ii. pp.98 105.614 GI7. Hug, vol.i. pp. 394 399.
II. Sect. IV.] Antient Latin Versions* 69
VI. PERSIC VERSIONS. Although we have no authentic account
of the conversion of the whole Persian nation to Christianity, yet we
are informed by Chrysostom and Theodoret, that the Scriptures were
very antiently translated into the Persian language. It does not ap-
pear, however, that any fragments of this antient version are extant.
The translation of the Pentateuch, printed in the 4th volume of
Bishop Walton's Polyglott, was executed by a Jew, for the benefit
of the Jews, in the eleventh or twelfth century. The Hebrew text
is, for the most part, faithfully rendered. Bishop Walton mentions
two Persic versions of the Psalms one by a Portuguese monk at
Ispahan in the year 1618, and another by some Jesuits from the Vul-
gate Latin version. l These are yet in manuscript.
There are extant two Persian Versions of the four Gospels, the
most antient and valuable of which was first printed in the London
Polyglott, by Bishop Walton, from a manuscript in the possession of
Dr. Pococke, dated A. D. 1314 : it was made from the Syriac, having ^
sometimes retained Syriac words, and subjoined a Persian translation.
The other Persian translation was edited by Wheloc, and after his
decease by Pierson, at London, in 1652-57, after a collation of three
manuscripts. It is supposed to have been made from the Greek. 3
SECTION IV.
ON THE ANTIENT WESTERN VERSIONS OP THE SCRIPTURES.
I. Antient Latin Versions of the Scriptures. I* Of the OLD ITALIC or
ANTE-HIERONYMIAN VERSION- 2. Account of the Biblical Labours ,
and Latin Version of JEROME, 3. Of the VULGATE VERSION and its
Revisions. 4*. Critical Value of the Latin Vulgate Version. IL GOTHIC
VERSION. III. SCLAVONIC VERSION. IV. ANGLO-SAXON VERSION.
I. ANTIENT LATIN VERSIONS OF THE SCRIPTURES. At the com-
incncement of the Christian oera, the Latin was gradually supplant-
ing the Greek as a general language, and it soon might be called the
language of the western church. From the testimony of Augustine 3 ,
it appears that the Latin church possessed a very great number of
versions of the Scriptures, made at the first introduction of Chris-
tianity, and whose authors were unknown; and that, in the primitive
times, as soon as any one found a Greek copy, and thought himself
sufficiently versed in both languages, he attempted a translation of
it. * In the course of time, this diversity of translation produced
i Walton, proLxvi, G 8. pp, 692 695. Kortholt, c, xix. pp. 301 303* Jahn,
n, 80. For an account of editions consult Masch, partii. vol. i. pp. 15* 164.
* Michaclis, vol. ii. pp. 105, 106. 617619. Semler, p. 69. Walton, Pro!, c. xvi.
9, pp. 695, 696. Hug, vol. i, pp. 389393.
a Augustine, do Doctr. Christ. I. ii. c. 11.
- 4 These various antient Latin versions, which are frequently termed Ante-Hteronymian,
and of the manuscripts of which some valuable fragments have been preserved to us in the
writings of the Fathers, were written in barbarous Latin, and frequently differed greatly.
Onfe single example, out of many that might be offered, will suffice. Col. ii, 15. as cited
by Hilary (de Trin. lib, i. c. 13.), runs thus : " Exutus carncm ex potentates ostentui
fecit, triumphatis iis cum fiduciA, iu scmet ipso." The same passage, as cited by Augustine,
F 3
70 Antient Western Versions of the Scriptures. [Part I. Ch.
much confusion, parts of separate versions being put together to form
an entire composition, and marginal notes being inserted into the text :
but one of these Latin translations appears to have acquired a more
extensive circulation than the others 9 and for several ages was prefer-
ably used, under the name of the Vetus Itala or old Italic, on account
of its clearness and fidelity. 1 This version, which in the time of Je-
rome was received as -canonical, is by him termed sometimes the Vul-
fate and sometimes the Old, in opposition to the new translation un-
er taken by him. He mentions no other version. The Old Italic
was translated from the Greek in the Old Testament as well as in the
New, there being comparatively few members of the Western church,
who were skilled in Hebrew, Prom the above cited expressions of
Augustine, it has been inferred that the old Italic version was made
in the first century of the Christian aera ; but the New Testament
could not have been translated into Latin before the canon had been
formed, which was certainly not made in the first century : and the
great number of Hebraisms and Syriasms observable in it, particu-
larly in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, have induced some emi-
nent critics to conjecture that the authors of this translation were
Jews converted to Christianity. 2 There is, however, every reason
to believe, that it was executed in the early part of the second cen-
tury : " at least it was quoted by Tertullian before the close of that
century. But, before the end of the fourth century, the alterations,
either designed or accidental, which were made by transcribers of
the Latin Bible, were become as numerous as the alterations in the
Greek Bible, before it was corrected by Origen." 3
2- To remedy this growing evil, Jerome, at the request, and under
the patronage of PopeDamasus, towards the close of the fourth cen-
tury, undertook to revise this translation, and make it more conform-
able to the original Greek. He executed the revision of the Old
Testament according to the Hexaplar text of Origen, which he went
to Csesarea to consult, and the New Testament after the original
Greek; and completed his task A. D. 390 or 391. Of this revision,
the Book of Job and the Psalms (which alone have been preserved
to our times), together with the Chronicles, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes*
(contra Faustum, lib. xvi. c. 29.) stands thus : " Exutus se carnem principatus et potes-
tates exemplavit, fiducialiter triumphatus eos in sernet ipso." Other examples may be seen
111 Hug, vol. i. pp. 454 456,
i Aiigustine, de Doct. Christ. l.ii. c.15. This passage of Augustine is suspected to be
incorrect^ and Bishop Marsh, after Bentley, Ernesti, Lardner, and other critics, thinks
that we oagbr to read ilia for Itala. (Michaelis, vol.ii, partii. p. 623. See also Dr. Lardner's
Works, vol. v, pp. 115, 116.) But this conjecture is supported by no manuscript, and is
also contradicted by the context of Augustine. M. Breyther, who has examined the
various conjectures and arguments, which have been alleged in support of the reading of
ilia, determines in favour of Itala as the genuine reading. (Dissert, de vi quam antiquis-
simse versiones, quse extant, in crisin Evang. IV. habeant, pp. 13 24.) Prof. Hug
also determines in favour of Itala. (Introd. to New Test. vol. i. pp. 460 S 461.)
2 " The learned and ingenious Eichhorn, in his introduction to the Old Testament,
supposes that the first Latin version of the Bible was made in Africa ; where Latin alone
being understood, a translation was more necessary ; where the Latin version was held in
the highest veneration ; and where, the language being spoken with less purity, barbarisms
might have been more easily introduced than in a provincial town in Italy*" Bp, Marsh's
Michaelis, vol. ii. partii. p. 628.
3 Bishop Marsh's Divinity Lectures, parti, p. G6,
II. Sect. IV.] Antient Latin Versions. 71
and Song of Solomon, are all that were ever published; JeromeV
manuscripts, comprising the remaining books of Scripture^ being lost
or destroyed through the wilful negligence or fraud of some indivi-
dual whom he has not named. 1 But before Jerome had finished hb
revisal, he had commenced a translation of the Old Testament from*
the Hebrew into Latin, in order that the Western Christians, who*
used this last language only, might know the real meaning of tl^e-
Hebrew text, and thus be the better qualified to engage in coritrd-
versial discussions with the Jews.
3. This version, which surpasses all former ones, was executed!
at different times, Jerome having translated particular books in the
order requested by his friends. We learn from Augustine, that it
was introduced into the churches by degrees, for fear of offending
weak persons : at length it acquired so great an authority from the*
approbation it received from Pope Gregory I. a that ever since the
seventh century it has been exclusively adopted 2 by the Romish
Church, under the name of the VULGATE version : and a decree of
the Council of Trent, in the sixteenth century, commanded that the
Vulgate alone should be used whenever the Bible is publicly read,,
and in all sermons, expositions, and disputations ; and pronounced ifc
to be authentic, a very ambiguous term, which ought to have been
more precisely defined, than the members of that Council chose to de-
fine it. " Upon this ground many contended, that theVulgate version
was dictated by the Holy Spirit ; at least was providentially guarded
against all error; was consequently of divine authority, and more ta
be regarded than even the original Hebrew and Greek texts. And,
in effect, the decree of the Council, however limited and moderated
by the explanation of some of their more judicious divines, has given
to the Vulgate such a high degree of authority, that, in this instance
at least, the translation has taken place of the original \ for these
translators, instead of the Hebrew and Greek texts, profess to translate
the Vulgate. Indeed, when we find the Vulgate very notoriously de-
ficient in expressing the sense, they do the original Scriptures the
honour of consulting them, and take the liberty, by following them,
of departing from their authentic guide ; but, in general, the Vulgate is
their original text \ and they give us a translation of a translation ; by
which second transfusion of the Holy Scriptures into another tongue,
still more of the original sense must be lost, and more of the genuine
spirit must evaporate." 3
The universal adoption of Jerome's new version throughout the
Western church rendered a multiplication of copies necessary ; and
with them new errors were introduced in the course of time, by the
intermixture of the two versions (the Old Italic, and Jerome's or the
Vulgate) with each other. Of this confusion, Cassiodorus was the
i Jerome, Ep. 64. ad Augustin,
s With the exception of the Psalms ; which being daily chaunted to music in the church
service, made it difficult to introduce alterations. The Old Italic Psalter, as corrected by
Jerome, has therefore been used ever since the time of Gregory I. The apocryphal books
of Baruch, Ecclebiasticus, Wisdom, and the two books of Maccabees, are also retained
from the old Latin version.
3 Bp. Lowth's Translation of Isaiah, vol. i. Prel, Diss, p. hxiii.
F 4
72" Antient Western Versions of the Scriptures. [Parti. Ch.
principal cause, who ordered them to be written in parallel columns,
that the old version might be corrected by the Vulgate ; and though
Alcuin in the eighth century, by the command of Charlemagne, pro-
vided more accurate copies, the text again fell into such confusion,
and was so disfigured by innumerable mistakes of copyists, (not-
withstanding the efforts made to correct it by Lanfranc archbishop
of Canterbury in the eleventh century, and by Cardinal Nicholas, and
some other divines, about the middle of the twelfth and in the thir-
teenth centuries) that the manuscripts of the middle ages materially
differ from the first printed editions.
Robert STEPHENS was the first who attempted to remedy this con-
fusion, by publishing his critical editions of the Vulgate in 1528, 1532,
1534, 154-0 1 y and particularly in 154-5 and 1546. These, especially
the last, having incurred the censures of the doctors of the Sorbonne,
John Henteniusj a divine of Louvain, was employed to prepare a
new edition of the Vulgate: this he accomplished in 1547 in folio,
having availed himself of Stephens's previous labours with great ad-
vantage. A third corrected edition was published by Lucas Bru-
gensis, with the assistance of several other divines of Louvain, in 1573,
in three volumes, 8vo., which was also reprinted in 1586 in 4-to. and
8vo., with the critical notes of Lucas Brugensis. The labours of the*
Louvain divines not being in every respect approved by Sixtus V., he
commanded a new revision of the text to be made with the utmost
care : to this work he devoted much time and attention, and corrected
the proofs himself of the edition which was published at Rome in 1590,
in folio. The text thus revised, Sixtus pronounced to be the authentic
Vulgate, which had been the object of inquiry in the Council of Trent;
and ordained that it should be adopted throughout the Romish
Church. But, notwithstanding the labours of the Pope, this edition
was discovered to be so exceedingly incorrect, that his successor
Gregory XIV. caused it to be suppressed ; and Clement VIII., the
successor of Gregory in the pontificate, published another authentic
Vulgate -in 1592. This, however, differs more than any other edition,
from that of Sixtus V., and mostly resembles that of Louvain. These
fatal variances between editions, alike promulgated by pontiffs claim-
ing infallibility, have not passed unnoticed by Protestant divines, who
have taken advantage of them in a manner that sensibly affects the
Church of Rome; especially Kortholt, who has at great length re-
futed the pretensions of Bellarmine in favour of the Vulgate in a mas-
i The edition of 1540 was Stephens's principal edition of the Latin Vulgate; as his
edition of 1550 was his principal edition of the Greek, In magnificence it surpasses
every edition of the Vulgate that ever was printed : and it is likewise of great value to a
cntic, as it contains a copious collection of readings from Latin manuscripts, and some of
the early editions. Father Simon (Hist, Grit, des Versions du N. Test, ch. xi p 130 \
calls it un c/ief-d'vuvre en fait de Mble ;" and (p. 131.) he terms this edition & *&.
lew* des ftrf." Hentemus, in his preface to the Louvain edition, calls it accumtisnma
et castigatimma BMia." (See also the praises bestowed on it in Masch's edition of Le
Wm n!* 1 ^T' F^' 1 ' V , L ffi - P ' 187<) The title -P & ^ P"fi* to the New
Testament bearsl the o>te i of 1539; though that which is prefixed to the Old Testament is
dated 1540. (Marsh s Letters to Travis, p. 254. note.J It is by this latter date, that
Stephens's best edition of the Vulgate is usually known and cited
II. Sect. IV.]
Antient Latin Versions.
terly manner \ and our learned countryman Thomas James, in his
Bellum Papale, sive Concordia Discors Sixti V. (London, 1600 9 4to.)
who has pointed out very numerous additions, omissions, contradic-
tions, and other differences between the Sixtine and Clementine edi-
tions. 2 From this very curious and now rare volume, the following
specimens of the differences between these two editions are selected,
and arranged.
1. Clauses omitted in the Sixtine, but inserted in the Clementine Bible.
Num. xxx. 11. Uxor in domo viri, <$c. to the end of the verse.
Prov. xxv. 24. Melius est sedere in angulo domatis, $c.
Lev. xx. 9. Patri nmtrique maledixit.
Jiid. xvii. 2, 3. Heddidit ergo eos inatri suec, $c.
1 Kingsiv. 21. Quia capta est area Dei.
3 Kings (same as our first] xii. 10. Sic loqueris ad eos.
2 Chron. ii. 10. JBt mni vigenti mittia metretas.
Matt, xxvii. 35. Ut implerelur quod dictum est per prophetam dicentem, dioiserunt sibi
vestimenta mea, et super vestem meant miserunt sortem.
2. Clauses or words introduced into the Sixtine, but omitted in the
Clementine Bible.
1 Sam. xxiv. 8. Vwil dominus, quia nisi dominus percusserit eum, aut dies ejus venerit
ut moriatur, aut descendens in praelium periret; propitius mifii sit
dominus ut non miltani manum itieam in Christum Domini.
1 Sam. xxv, 6. Exmultis annis salvos facie us tuoset omnia tua.
2 Sam.vi. 12. Dixitque David, ibo et reducam arcam.
2 Sam. viii. 8, De quo fecit Salomo omnia vasa cerea in templo et mare asneum et
columnas et altare.
2 Sam, xix. 10. Et concilium totius Israel venit adregem.
Prov. xxiv. ult. Usque quo piger dormis ? usque quo de somno consurges*
Hab. i. 3. Quare respicis contemptores et taces conculcante impio justiorem se f Et
fades homines quasi pisces maris, et quasi reptilia non habentia ducem
Matt xxiv. 41. Duo in lecto, u?iua assumetur, et unus relinquetur.
Acts xiv. 6. Et commota est omnis multitudo in doctrina eorum t Paulus autem t <Jc.
xxiv. 18, 19. Et apprehenderunt me clamantes et dicentes, tolle inimicum nostrum.
3. Manifest contradictions, or differences between the editions.
Ex. xxiii. 18. Sixtine Tuts, Clementine mea.
Numb, xxxiv. 4. S. Ad meridiem, C. A meridie.
Deut. xvii. 8. S. Inter lepram et non lepram, C. Inter tepram et lepram.
Jos. ii. 18. S. Signum nonfuerit, C. Signumfuerit.
jv. 23. S. Deo nostro, C. Vestro.
xi. 1 9. S. Qua se non traderet, C. Q.UCE se traderet.
xiv. 3. S. Two, C. Meo.
1 Sam, iv. 9. S. Nobis, C. Vobis.
xx. 9. S. A me t C. A te.
1 Kings vii. 9. S. Intrinsecus, C. Extrinsecus.
Hab. i. 13. S. Quare non restricts, C. Respiris.
Heb. v. 11. S. Interpreteibftis, C. Ininlerpretabilis.
2 Pet. i. 16. S, Indoctas, C. Docttts*
4>. Differences in numbers-
Ex, xxiv. 5. S. Vitulos duodecem, C. Vitulos*
xxxii, 28. S. Trigenta tria millia, C. Vigenti millia.
Q Sam. xv. 7. S. Qitatuor, C. Quadrigenta.
1 Kings iv, 42. S, Quinque mittift, C. Quinqite et milk.
2 Kings xiv. 17. S, Viginti Quinque, C. Quindecem.
xxv. 1 9. S. Sex, C. Sexagenta.
2 Chron. xiii, 17* S. Quinquogenta, C. Quingenta.
i Kortholt, de variis Scripture Editionibus, pp. 110 25U
% Additional instances of the contradictions between the above-mentioned papal editions,
together with a defence of the Bellum Papale, may be seen in Mr, James's Treatise of
the Corruptions of Scripture, Councils, and Fathers, by the Prelates, Pastors, and Pillars ot
the Church of Rome, for the Maintenance of Popery," pp,272 358. London, 1688. 8vo.
74? Antient Western Versions of the Scriptures. [Part I. Ch,
5. Other remarkable differences.
3 Sam, iii. 2,3. S. Nee poterat videre lucernam TJei antequam extingueretur.
C. Nee poterat videre; lucerna Dei antequam extingueretur.
1 Kings ii, 28. S. Ad Salomonem, C. Ad Jaob.
2 KJngs xv. 1 9. S. In tkersam, C. In terram.
Judith i. 2. S. Fecit, ejus muros in altitudinem 7O cubitus . this is one of those places
where paper had been pasted on the text, the word first printed was
latitudinem, and altitudinem was printed on a slip of paper, and put
over it, C. Latiludinem.
Ibidem. S. Latitudinem, 30 cu. C. Altitudinem, SO ciibtius.
Job xxxi. 75. S. Si secutus est ocuhts meus cor meum, C. Si secutum et oculos meus
cor meum.
Psa. xli. 3. S. AdDeumfontem vivum, C. Ad jDewnfortem, vivum.
Prov. six. 23. S. Qui affligitpatremetfugit matrem, C. Qui qffligat,$c. etfugat,$c.
xx, 25. S. JDevorare sanctos, C. Devotare sanctos.
Ezek. xiv. 22. S. Egredientur, C. Ingredientur.
Sirach xxxviii.25. S. Sapientiam $crib&, C. Sapientia scribes.
xlii. 9. S. Adulterat C. Adulta.
Isaiah xlvi. 12. S. Justum, C. Avem.
Jer, xvii. 9. S. Cor hominis, C, Hominum* l
Besides the preceding revisions by papal authority, there have
been several others executed by private individuals ; in which the
Latin Vulgate has been so much corrected from the original He-
brew and Greek, that they have in some degree been considered
(though erroneously) as new translations. Of this number are the
Latin Bibles published by Clarius, Eber, and the Osianders.
[i.] Isidore CLARIUS'S edition of the Vulgate first appeared at
Venice in 1542, and is of extreme rarity: it was reprinted at the
same place in 1557 and 1564?. He has not only restored the antient
Latin text, but has also corrected it in a great number of places which
he conceived to be erroneously translated, so as to make them con-
formable to the Hebrew original. Although he corrected more than
eight thousand places^ as he states in his preface, yet he omitted some,
lest he should offend the Roman Catholics by making too many
alterations in the Vulgate version.
[ii.] The method of Clarius was followed by Paul EBEK, who cor-
rected the Vulgate from Luther's German version. His edition was
published at Wittemberg, in 1565, with the addition of Luther's
translation, under the authority of Augustus, Elector of Saxony; and
was reprinted in 1574, in ten volumes, quarto.
[iii.] The edition of Z^fo-OsiANDER appeared in 1578, and has since
been very often reprinted ; as also has a German translation of it,
which was first published at Stutgard in 1 600. Andrew Osiander's
edition was also printed in 1600, and frequently since. They have
both corrected the Vulgate, according to the Hebrew originals; and
have occasioned some confusion to their readers, by inserting their
emendations in a character different from that in which the
text is printed.
4. The Vulgate is regarded by Papists and Protestants in very
different points of view : by the former it has been extolled beyond
measure, while by most of the latter it has been depreciated as much
below its intrinsic merit. Our learned countryman, John Bois
(canon of Ely), was the first who pointed out the real value of this
1 Hamilton's Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures, pp. 163 166.
II. Sect. IV.] The Gothic Version. 75
version, in his Collatio Veteris Interprets cum Bezd aliisgue recen~
tioribus (8vo. 1655). In this work, which is now of extreme rarity,
the author has successfully shown that, in many places, the modern
translators had unduly depreciated the Vulgate, and unnecessarily
departed from it. Bois was followed by Father Simon, in his His-
toire Critique du Texte et des Versions du Nouveau Testament, who has
proved that the more antient the Greek manuscripts and other
versions are, the more closely do they agree with the Vulgate : and
in consequence of the arguments adduced by Simon, the Vulgate
has been more justly appreciated by biblical critics of later times.
Although the Latin Vulgate is neither inspired nor infallible, as
Morinus, Suarez, and other advocates of the Romish Church have
-attempted to maintain, yet it is allowed to be in general a faithful
translation, and sometimes exhibits the sense of Scripture with
greater accuracy than the more modern versions : for all those which
have been made in modern times, by divines in communion with the
Church of Rome, are derived from the Latin Vulgate, which, in
consequence of the decree of the Council of Trent above noticed,
has been substituted for -the original Hebrew and Greek texts. The
Latin Vulgate, therefore, is by no means to be neglected by the bib-
lical critic: and since the Ante-Hieronymian Latin translations are
unquestionably of great antiquity, both lead us to a discovery of the
readings in very antient Greek manuscripts, which existed prior to
the date of any now extant. Even in its present state, notwith-
standing the variations between the Sixtine and Clementine editions,
and that several passages are mistranslated, in order to support the
peculiar dogmas of the Church of Rome, the Latin Vulgate pre-
serves many true readings J , where the modern Hebrew copies are
corrupted. *
II. The GOTHIC VERSION of the Bible was made from the Greek,
both in the Old and in the New Testament, by Ulphilas 3 , a cele-
brated Bishop of the Mseso-Goths, who assisted at the council of
Constantinople in 359, and was sent on an embassy to the emperor
Valens about the year 378. He is said to have embraced Arianism,
and to have propagated Arian tenets among his countrymen. Besides
translating the entire Bible into the Gothic language, Ulphilas is said
to have conferred on the Maeso-Goths the invention of the Gothic
characters. The character, however, in which this version of the
1 Cappell has given numerous examples in his Critica Sacra, lib. ii. cc.vii. is. torn, ii.
pp. 858898. (edit. Scharfenberg).
a The preceding account of the Latin versions has been compiled from Michaelis,
vol. ii. pp.107 129, Semler, Apparatus ad Liberalem Vet. Test. Interpretationem,
pp. 308 314. Carpzov. Critica Sacra, pp. 671 706. Leusden, Philologus Hebrseo-
mixtus, pp. 1 10. Bishop Walton, Prol. c. xi. pp. 470 507. ; and Viser, Herraeneu-
tica Sacra Novi Testamenti, vol. ii. partiii. pp.73 96. See also Muntinghe's Expositio
Critices Veteris Fcederis, pp. H9 156.; and Hug's Introduction, vol. i. pp.464 483.
For the principal editions of the Latin versions of the Scriptures, see the Appendix,
pp. 4446.
3 This," says Bishop Marsh, (t is an original German name, and is a diminutive of the
word Wolf: it is written in correct German, Wolfelein, but corruptly pronounced
Woifila or Wulfila, in the dialects of Switzerland, Bavaria, and Austria, to which that of
the Ms&so- Goths, who likewise inhabited the banks of the Danube, is nearly allied." Mi-
chaelis, vol. ii. partii. p. 631,
76 Antient Western Versions of the Swiptures. [Part I. Ch.
New Testament is written, is, in fact, the Latin character of that
age; and the degree of perfection, which the Gothic language had
obtained during "the time of Ulphilas, is a proof that it had then
been written for some time.
The translation of Ulphilas (who had been educated among the
Greeks) was executed from the Greek : but, from its coincidence in
many instances with the Latin, there is reason to suspect that it has
been interpolated, though at a remote period, from the Vulgate. Its
unquestionable antiquity, however, and its general fidelity, have con-
curred to give this version a high place in the estimation of biblical
clitics : but s unfortunately, it has not come down to us entire . The
only parts extant in print are, a fragment of the book of Nehemiah,
a considerable portion of the four Gospels, and some portions of
the apostolic epistles. l
III. The SCLAVONIC, or Old Russian Version, was also made
from the Greek, both in the Old and New Testaments. It is ascribed
to the two brothers, Cyril ' 2 (or Con stan tine, surnamed the Philoso-
pher on account of his learning,) and Methodius, sons of Leo a
Greek nobleman of Thessalonica, who, in the latter part of the
ninth century, first preached the Gospel among the Moravo-Sclavo-
nians : but it is questionable, whether these missionaries translated
the whole of the sacred code, or whether their labours comprised
only the books of the New Testament and the Psalms of David.
M. Dobrowsky (who has bestowed more pains on the critical study
of the Sclavonic Scriptures than any person now living) is of opinion
" that, with the exception of the Psalms, no part of the Old Testa-
ment was translated at so early a period. So much, however, is
certain, that the book of Proverbs must have been translated before,
or in the twelfth century, as the frequent quotations made from it
by Nestor (author of the Russian Chronicle, who died in 1156,)
agree, on the whole, with the common text. The books of Job, on
me other hand, the Prophets, and the apocryphal books of Wis-
dom and Ecclesiasticus, appear to have been done in Servia, in the
thirteenth or fourteenth century ; and the Pentateuch and remaining
books in the fifteenth, either in Russia or Poland, at which time the
whole were collected into one volume, and arranged according to
the order of the books in the Bohemian Bible, printed in 1488
or 1489." The extreme rarity and recent date of MSS. of the
entire Sclavonic Bible greatly corroborated this hypothesis of
M. Dobrowsky, respecting the late execution of this version of
the Old Testament* 3 Dr. Henderson has shown, by actual col-
1 Michaelis, vol. ii. parti, pp.130 153. H9 J52. Hug, vol. i, pp.498 513.
2 To this Cyril is ascribed the invention of the Sclavonic letters : " But, it is manifest,
this invention consisted in nothing more than the adaptation of the uncial characters of the
Greek alphabet, so far as they went, to express the sounds of the new language, with the ad-
dition of certain other letters, borrowed or changed from other alphabets, to make up the
deficiency. He also substituted Sclavonic for the Phenician names of the letters ; on
which account the alphabet has been called the Cyrillic, after his name.*' Dr. Henderson's
Biblical Researches and Travels in Russia, p. 67. (London, 1826.) In pp. 60- 102. the
learned traveller has given an extended and very interesting account of the Sclavonic lan-
guage and sacred literature, from which the present notice of the Sclavonic version is
abridged. 3 Ibid. pp. 73, 74.
II. Sect. IV.] The Anglo-Saxon Version. 77
Iation 3 that the Sclavonic text of the Old Testament, in the editio
princeps of the Bible printed at Ostrog in 1581, was made with the
assistance of the Vulgate or some antient Latin MSS. found in the
Bulgarian monasteries, or that it was at least 'revised and altered
according to them : and he is of opinion that, if this edition were
carefully collated, it would yield a rich harvest of various readings,
some of which might prove of essential service to a future editor of
the Septuagint. 1
According to Professor Hug, the Sclavonic version exhibits the
text of the Constantinopolitan recension, M, Dobrowsky pro-
nounces it to be a very literal translation from the Greek, the Greek
construction being very frequently retained, even where it is con-
trary to the genius of the Sclavonian language; and in general it
resembles the most antient manuscripts, with which it agrees, even
where their united evidence is against the common printed reading,
" It contains at least three fourths of the readings which Grieshach
has adopted into his text" [in his critical edition of the New Tes-
mentQ. " Where he has few authorities, the Sclavonic mostly cor-
roborates the authority of the textus receptus : and, where a great
agreement obtains among the antient MSS. in favour of a reading,
it joins them against the common editions. It varies from Theo-
phylact as often as it agrees with him, and has neither been altered
from him nor the Vulgate:"' 2 and it possesses few or no lectiones
singulares, or readings peculiar to itself. 3 From an edition of this
version, printed at Moscow in 1614, M. Alter selected the readings
of the Four Gospels, and from a manuscript in the imperial library,
the readings of the Acts and Epistles, which are printed in his
edition of the Greek New Testament. (Vienna, 1787, 2 vols. 8vo-)
M. Dobrowsky states that these various Jections are given with great
accuracy, but that those which Matthai has selected from the Re-
velation are erroneous and useless. Griesbach has given a catalogue
of the Sclavonic manuscripts collated for his edition of the New
Testament, communicated to him by Dobrowsky. 4
IV. ANGLO-SAXON VERSION. Although Christianity was planted
in Britain in the first century, it does not appear that the Britons
had any translation of the Scriptures in their language earlier than
the eighth century. About the year 706, Adhelm, the first bishop
of Sherborn, translated the Psalter into Saxon : and at his earnest
persuasion, Egbert or Eadfrid, bishop of Lindisfarne, or Holy Island,
soon after executed a Saxon version of the Four Gospels. 5 Not
i Dr. Henderson's Biblical Researches and Travels in Russia, p. 88.
Ibid. pp. 89, 90.
3 Dr. Henderson cprroborates this account of M. Dobrowsky, and slates that this ver-
sion may be considered as one of the most verbal ever executed. Not only is every
word and particle scrupulously expressed, and made, in general, to occupy the same place
In the translation that it does in the original, but the derivation and compounds, as well
as the grammatical forms, are all successfully imitated." (Ibid, pp. 91, 9&)
* Michaelis, vol.ii. pp. 153 158. fi36, 637. Griesbach, Prolegomena, vol.i. pp.cxxvii.
cxxxii. Beck, Monograminata Hermeneutices Novi Testament!, pp. 108, 109. Hug,
vol. i, pp.513 517.
9 The manuscript of this translation is now deposited in the Cottonian Library in the
British Museum (Nero, j>, iv.) ; Mr. Astle has given a specimen of it in plate xiv. of his
* e Origin and Progress of Writing," and has described it in pp. 1OO, 101.
78 Antient Western Versions of the Scriptures. [Part I. Ch.
many years after this, the learned and venerable Bede (who died
A, u. 735) translated the entire Bible into that language. There
were other Saxon versions, either of the whole or of detached por-
tions of the Scriptures, of a later date. A translation of the book
of Psalms was undertaken by the illustrious King Alfred, who died
A. D. 900, when it was about half finished : and Elfric, who was
archbishop of Canterbury in 995, translated the Pentateuch, Joshua,
Job, Judith, part of the book of Kings, Esther, and Maccabees.
The entire Anglo-Saxon version of the Bible has never been printed :
King Alfred's translation of the Psalms, with the interlineary Latin
text, was edited by John Spelman, 4to. London, 1640; and there
is another Saxon interlineary translation of the Psalter, deposited in
the Archiepiscopal Library at Lainbeth. Of the Four Gospels, there
have been three editions printed : an account of which will be found
in the Appendix, pp. 48, 49.
The Anglo-Saxon version being evidently translated from the Old
"ijLatin, Michaelis is of opinion that it may be of use in determining
the readings of that version ; and Semler has remarked, that it con-
tains many readings which vary both from the Greek and Latin texts,
of which he has given some examples. Dr. Mill selected various
lections from this version ; which, from the difference of style and
inequalities observable in its execution, he ascribes to several au-
thors : it is supposed to have been executed in the eighth century. *
On the application of antient versions to the ascertaining of various
readings, see Part I. Chap. V. of this volume ; and on the benefit
which may be derived from them in the interpretation of the Scrip-
tures, see Part II. Book I. Chap. II. Sect. I. 2.
i Johnson's Hist. Account of English Translations of the Bible, in Bishop Watson's
Collection of Theological Tracts, vol. iii. pp. 61 63. Bp. Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii.
pp, 158. 637. Kortholt, pp,351 553. Semler, Apparatus ad Lib, Novi Test. Interp.
pp. 72, 73.
III. Sect, L] On the Manuscripts of the Bible.
79
CHAPTER III.
ON THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE*
Form of a SYNAGOGUE ROIL of the Pentateuch.
SECTION L
ON THE HEBREW MANUSCRIPTS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
L Different classes of Hebrew Manuscripts. II. The Rolled Manuscripts
of the Synagogues. III. The Square Manuscripts used by the Jews
in private life. IV. Antient Recensions or Editions of Hebrew Manit*
scripts. V. Age of Hebrew Manuscripts. VI. Of the order in which
the Sacred BOOKS are arranged in Manuscripts. Number of Books
contained in different Manuscripts. VII. Modern Families or Recen-
sions of Hebrew Manuscripts, VIII. Notice of the most antient Manu~
scripts. IX. Brief notice of the Manuscripts of the Indian Jews*
ALTHOUGH, as we have already seen, the Hebrew text of the
Old Testament has descended to our times uncorrupted, yet, with
all the care which the antient copyists could bestow, it was impossibe
to preserve it free from mistakes, arising from the interchanging of
the similar letters of the Hebrew alphabet, and other circumstances
incident to the transcription of antient manuscripts. The Rabbins
boldly asserted, and, through a credulity rarely to be paralleled, it
was implicitly believed, that the Hebrew text was absolutely free
from error, and that in all the manuscripts of the Old Testament
not a single various reading of importance could be produced. Fa-
ther Morin was the first person who ventured to impugn this notion
in his Exercitationes in utrumque Samaritanorum Pentatei^chum^ pub-
lished at Paris in 1631 ; and he grounded his opinion of the incor-
rectness of the Hebrew manuscripts on the differences between the
Hebrew and the Samaritan texts in the Pentateuch, and on the dif-
ferences between the Hebrew and the Septuagint in other parts of
the Bible. Morinus was soon after followed by Louis Cappel,
(whose Critica Sacra was published in 1650,) who pointed out a
great number of errors in the printed Hebrew, and showed how
they might be corrected by the antient versions and the common
80 On the Hebrew Manuscripts [Part I. Ch.
rules of criticism. He did not, however, advert to the most obvious
and effectual means of emendation, namely, a collation of Hebrew
manuscripts ; and, valuable as his labours unquestionably are, it is
certain that he neither used them himself, nor invited others to have
recourse to them, in order to correct the sacred text. Cappel was
assailed by various opponents, but chiefly by the younger Buxtorf
in his AnticriticcL) published at Basil in 1653, who attempted, but
in vain, to refute the principles he had established. In 1657 Bishop
Walton, in his Prolegomena to the London Polyglott Bible, declared
in favour of the principles asserted by Cappel, acknowledged the ne-
cessity of forming a critical apparatus for the purpose of obtaining,
a more correct text of the Hebrew Bible, and materially contributed
to the formation of one by his own exertions. Subsequent biblical
critics acceded to the propriety of their arguments, and since the mid-
dle of the seventeenth century, the importance and necessity of col-
lating Hebrew manuscripts have been generally acknowledged. l
I. Hebrew manuscripts are divided into two CLASSES, viz. auto-
graphs, or those written by the inspired penmen themselves, which
have long since perished ; and apograp/is, or copies made from the
originals, and multiplied by repeated transcription. These apo-
graphs are also divided into the more antient, which formerly enjoyed
the highest authority among the Jews, but have in like manner
perished long ago ; and into the more modern, which are found dis-
persed in various public and private libraries. The manuscripts
which are still extant, are subdivided into the rolled manuscripts
used in the synagogues, and into the square manuscripts which are
used by private individuals among the Jews.
II. The Pentateuch was read in the Jewish synagogues from the
earliest times; and, though the public reading of it was intermitted
during the Babylonish captivity, it was resumed shortly after the
return of the Jews. Hence numerous copies were made from time
to time; and as they held the books of Moses in the most ' supersti-
tious veneration, various regulations were made for the guidance of
the transcribers, who were obliged to conform to them in copying
the ROLLS destined for the use of the synagogue. The date of these
regulations is not known, but they are long posterior to the Talmud ;
and though many of them are the most ridiculous and useless that
can be well conceived, yet the religious observance of them, which
has continued for many centuries, has certainly contributed in a great
degree to preserve the purity of the Pentateuch. The following are
a few of the principal of these regulations.
The copies of the law must be transcribed from antient manu-
scripts of approved character only, with pure ink, on parchment pre-
pared from tlie hide of a clean animal, for this express purpose, by
a Jew, and fastened together by the strings of clean animals; every,
skin must contain a certain number of columns of prescribed length
wl breadth, each column comprising a given number of lines and
s; no word must be written by heart or with points, or without
1 Bisbop Marsh's Lectures, .part ii. p. 99.
III. Sect, L] Of the Old Testament. 81
being first orally pronounced by the copyist ; the name of God is
not to be written but with the utmost devotion and attention, and
previously to writing it, he must wash his pen. The want of a single
letter, or the redundance of a single letter, the writing of prose as
verse, or verse as prose, respectively vitiates a manuscript ; and when
a copy has been completed, it must be examined and corrected within
thirty days after the writing has been finished, in order to determine
whether it is to be approved or rejected. These rules, it is said, are
observed to the present day by the persons who transcribe the sa-
cred writings for the use of the synagogue. * The form of one of
these rolled manuscripts (from the original among the Harleian MSS.
in the British Museum, No. 7619.) is given in the vignette at the
head of this section. It is a large double roll, containing the Hebrew
Pentateuch ,* written with very great care on forty bi* own African
skins. These skins are of different breadths, some containing more
columns than others. The columns are one hundred and fifty-three
in number, each of which contains about sixty-three lines, is about
twenty-two inches deep, and generally more than five inches broad.
The letters have no points, apices, or flourishes about them. The
initial words are not larger than the rest ; and a space, equal to about
four lines, is left between every two books. Altogether, this is one
of the finest specimens of the synagogue-rolls that has been preserved
to the present time.
III. The SQUARE MANUSCRIPTS, which are in private use, are written
with black ink, either on vellum or on parchment, or on paper, and
of various sizes, folio, quarto, octavo, and duodecimo- Those which
are copied on paper are considered as being the most modern ; and
they frequently have some one of the Targ'ums or Chaldee Para-
phrases, either subjoined to the text in alternate verses, or placed in
parallel columns with the text, or written in the margin of the manu-
script. The characters are, for the mast part, those which are called
the square Chaldee ; though a few manuscripts are written with rab-
binical characters, but these are invariably of recent date. Biblical
critics, who are conversant with the Hebrew manuscripts, have dis-
tinguished three sorts of characters, each differing in the beauty of
their form. The Spanish character is perfectly square, simple, and
elegant : the types of the quarto Hebrew Bibles, printed by Robert
Stephen and by Plantin, approach the nearest to this character. The
German, on the contrary, is crooked, intricate, and inelegant, in every
respect ; and the Italian character holds a middle place between these
two. The pages are usually divided into three columns of various
lengths ; and the initial letters of the manuscripts are frequently il-
luminated and ornamented with gold. In many manuscripts the 1
Masora a is added ; what is called the larger Masora being placed
above and below the columns of the text, and the smaller Masora
facing inserted in the blank spaces between the columns*
IV. In the period between the sixth and the tenth centuries, the
Jews had two celebrated academies, one at Babylon in the east, and
1 Carpzov. Critica Sacra Vet. Test. pp. 371, 372,
9 See an account of the Masora in Chap, IV. Sect I. IV. infra.
VOL, II* G .
82 On the Hebrew Manuscripts [Part I. Ch.
another at Tiberias in the west; where their literature was cultivated,
and the Scriptures were very frequently transcribed. Hence arose
two RECENSIONS or editions of the Hebrew Scriptures, which were
collated in the eighth or ninth century. The differences or various
readings observed in them were noted, and have been transmitted
to our time under the appellation of the oriental and occidental or
eastern and western readings. They are variously computed at 210,
216, and 220, and are printed by Bishop Walton in the Appendix
to his splendid edition of the Polyglott Bible. In the early part of
the eleventh century, Aaron ben Asher, president of the academy
at Tiberias, and Jacob ben Naphtali, president of the academy at Ba-
bylon, collated the manuscripts of the oriental and occidental Jews.
The discrepancies observed by these eminent Jewish scholars amount
to upwards of 864; with one single exception, they relate to the
vowel points, and, consequently, are of little value; they are also
printed by Bishop Walton. The western Jews, and our printed
editions of the Hebrew Scriptures, almost wholly follow the recen-
sion of Aaron ben Asher.
Among the Jews five exemplars have been particularly celebrated
for their singular correctness, and from them all their subsequent
copies have been made. These standard copies bear the names of
the Codex of Hillel, of Ben Asher, which is also called thePalestine
or Jerusalem Codex, of Ben Naphtali, or the Babylonian Codex, the
Pentateuch of Jericho, and the Codex Sinai.
1. The Codex of Hillel was a celebrated manuscript which Rabbi
Kimchi (who lived in the twelfth century) says that he saw at Toledo,
though Rabbi Zacuti, who flourished towards the close of the fif-
teenth century, states that part of it had been sold and sent into
Africa. Who this Hillel was, the learned are by no means agreed ;
some have supposed that he was the very eminent Rabbi Hillel who
lived about sixty years before the birth of Christ ; others imagine
that he was the grandson of the illustrious Rabbi Jehudah Hakka- j
dosh, who wrote the Misna, and that he flourished about the middle
of the fourth century. Others, again, suppose that he was a Spanish
Jew, named Hillel; but Bauer, with greater probability, supposes
the manuscript to have been of more recent date, and written in
Spain, because it contains the vowel points, and all the other gram-
matical minutiae ; and that the feigned name of Hillel was inscribed
on its title in order to enhance its value.
2, 3. The Codices of Ben Asher and Ben Naphtali have already
been noticed. We may, however, state, on the authority of Mai-
monides, that the first of these was held in most repute in Egypt, as
having been revised and corrected in very many places by Ben Asher
himself, and that it was the exemplar which he (Maimonides) followed
in copying the law, in conformity with the custom of the Jews.
4. The Codex of Jericho is highly commended by Rabbi Elias
-Levita, as being the most correct copy of the Law of Moses, and
exhibiting the defective and full words.
5. The Codex Sinai was also a ver,y correct manuscript of the
Pentateuch^ that presented some variation in the accents, in which
respect it differed from the former, A sixth Codex, called Sanbouki,
III. Sect. L] Of the Old Testament. 83
is mentioned by Pere Simon, as having been seen by him ; but no-
thing certain is known respecting its date, or by whom it was written.
V. As the authority of manuscripts depends greatly on their an-
tiquity, it becomes a point of considerable importance to ascertain
their AGE as exactly as possible. Now this may be effected either
by external testimony or by internal marks.
1. External testimony is sometimes afforded by the subscriptions
annexed by the transcribers, specifying the time when they copied
the manuscripts. But this criterion cannot always be depended
upon : for instances have occurred, in which modern copyists have
added antient and false dates in order to enhance the value of their
labours. As, however, by far the greater number of manuscripts
have no subscriptions or other criteria by which to ascertain their
date, it becomes necessary to resort to the evidence of
2. Internal MarJcs. Of these, the following are stated by Dr.
Kennicott and M, De Rossi to be the principal: 1. The inelegance
or rudeness of the character (Jablonski lays down the simplicity and
elegance of the character as a criterion of antiquity) ; 2. The yel-
low colour of the vellum ; 3. The total absence, or at least the
very rare occurrence, of the Masora, and of the Keri and Ketib ] ;
4. The writing of the Pentateuch throughout in one book, without
any greater mark of distinction appearing at the beginning of books
than at the beginning of sections ; 5. The absence of critical
emendations and corrections ; 6. The absence of the vowel points ;
7- Obliterated letters, being written and re-written with ink ;
8. The frequent occurrence of the name Jehovah in lieu of Adonai ;
9. The infrequency of capital and little letters ; 10. The inser-
tion of points to fill up blank spaces; II. The non-division of
some books and psalms ; 12. The poetical books not being distin-
guished from those in prose by dividing them into hemistichs ;
13. Readings frequently differing from the Masoretic copies, but
agreeing with the Samaritan text, with antient versions, and with the
quotations of the fathers. The conjunction of all, or of several, of
these internal marks, is said to afford certain criteria of the antiquity
of Hebrew manuscripts. But the opinions of the eminent critics
above named have been questioned by Professors Bauer and Tychsen,
who have advanced strong reasons to prove that they are uncertain
guides in determining the age of manuscripts. The most antient
Hebrew manuscripts are all written without any divisions of words,
as is evident not only from antient Hebrew coins and Palmyrene
inscriptions, but also from various passages in the most antient trans-
lations, the authors of which frequently adopted a division of words,
altogether different from that of the Masorites. This circumstance
is also corroborated by the rabbinical tradition, that the law was for-
merly one verse and one word. It is impossible to determine the
time, when the Hebrews began to divide words in manuscripts : we
only know from the researches of Dr. Kennicott and other eminent
Hebrew critics, that all the antient interpreters used manuscripts
written in one continued series ; that MSS. of more recent date (the
1 For an account of these, see. Chap, IV. Sect, I. IV. infra.
Gr 2
$4? On the Hebrew Manuscripts [Part I. Ch.
thirteenth century) are still extant in which the same mode of writ-
ing appears, for instance, the MSS. numbered 290. and 293. by
Dr. Kennicott ; and that some vestiges of the division of words are
to be found in the Talmudical writings, and in Jerome. *
VI. A twofold ORDER of ARRANGEMENT of the sacred books is ob-
servable in Hebrew manuscripts, \ iz. the Talmudical and the Masoretic.
Originally,' the different books of the Old Testament were not joined
together: according to Rabbi Elias Levita (the most learned Jewish
writer on the subject), they were first joined together by the mem-
bers of the great synagogue, who divided them into three parts,
the law, the prophets, and hagiographa, and who placed the prophets
and hagiographa in a different order from that assigned by the Tal-
mudists in the book intitled Baba Bathra.
The following is the Talmudical arrangement of the Old Testa-
ment : Of the Prophets, Joshua 3 Judges, Samuel, Kings ( 1 and 2),
Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve Minor Prophets (in one
book). Of the Hagiographa^ Ruth, Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, Song
of Solomon, Lamentations, Esther, Chronicles. By the Masorites,
the Prophets are placed in the same order, with the exception of
Isaiah, who precedes Jeremiah and Ezekiel, because he flourished
before them. This arrangement is adopted in the manuscripts of
the Spanish Jews, while the Talmudical order is preserved in those
of the German and French Jews. In the Hagiographa the Maso-
rites have departed from the arrangement of the Talmudists, and
place the books comprised in that division thus : Psalms, Job,
Proverbs, Ruth, the Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Lamentations
of Jeremiah, Esther, Daniel, and Ezra. This mode of arrangement
obtains in the Spanish manuscripts. But in the German MSS.
they are thus disposed : Psalms, Proverbs, Job, the Five Megilloth
(or books), Daniel, Ezra, and Chronicles ; and the Five Megilloth
(or books) are placed in the order in which they are usually read in
their synagogues, viz. the Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations of
Jeremiah, Ecclesiastes* and Esther.
There are, however, several manuscripts extant, which depart both
from the Talmudicai and from the Masoretical order, and have an
arrangement peculiar to themselves. Thus, in the Codex Norim-
bergensis 1. (No. 198. of Dr. Kennicott's catalogue), which was writ-
ten A. D. 1291, the books are thus placed : the Pentateuch, Joshua,
Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Twelve Mi-
nor Prophets, Ruth, Esther, Psalms, Job, Ecclesiastes, Song of So-
lomon, Lamentations, Proverbs, Daniel, Ezra, and Nehemiah (in
one book), and Chronicles. In the Codex, No. 94., written A. D.
1285 (in the university library, at Cambridge), and also in No. 102.,
a manuscript in the British Museum, written early in the fourteenth
century, the books of Chronicles precede the Psalms ; Job is placed
before the Proverbs ; Ruth before the Song of Solomon ; and Eccle-
siastes before the Lamentations. In the Codex, No. 130., a ma-
nuscript of the same date (in the library of the Royal Society of
London), Chronicles and Ruth precede the Psalms; and in the
1 Muntinglioe, Expositio Crit. Vet. Feed, pp, 40, 41,
III. Sect. L] Of the Old Testament. fii
Codex, No. 96., (in the library of St. John's College, Cambridge,)
written towards the close of the fourteenth century, and also in many
other MSS., Jeremiah takes precedence of Isaiah. In the Codex
Regiomontanus 2. (No. 224?.), written early in the twelfth century,
Jeremiah is placed before Ezekiel, whose book is followed by that of
Isaiah : then succeed the Twelve Minor Prophets. The Hagiogra-
pha are thus disposed : Ruth, Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes,
Song of Solomon, Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra and Nehe-
miah (in one book), and the books of Chronicles (also in one book).
The order pursued in the Codex Ebnerianus 2. is altogether dif-
ferent from the preceding, Samuel follows Jeremiah, who is suc-
ceeded by the two books of Kings, and by part of the prophecy of
Ezekiel : then comes part of Isaiah, The Twelve Minor Prophets
are written in one continued discourse ; and are followed by Ruth,
Psalms, Job, Proverbs with Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon,
Lamentations, Daniel, Esther, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Chronicles.
Of the various Hebrew manuscripts which have been preserved,
few contain the Old Testament entire : the greater part comprise
only particular portions of it, as the Pentateuch, five Megilloth, and
Haphtaroth, or sections of the prophets which are read on the sab-
bath-days ; the Prophets or the Hagiographa. Some, indeed, are
confined to single books, as the Psalms, the book of Esther, the Song
of Solomon, and the Haphtaroth. This diversity in the contents of
manuscripts is occasioned, partly by the design of the copyist, who
transcribed the whole or part of the sacred writings for particular pur-
poses ; and partly by the mutilations caused by the consuming hand
of time. Several instances of such mutilations are given in the account
of the principal Hebrew MSS. now extant, in pp. 87 89. infra.
VII. As the Hebrew manuscripts which have been in use since
the eleventh century have all been corrected according to some par-
ticular recension or edition, they have from this circumstance been
classed into FAMILIES, according to the country where such recension
Las obtained. These families or recensions are three or four in
number, viz.
1. The SpanisJi Manuscripts, which were corrected after the Codex
of Hillel. They follow the Masoretic system with great accuracy,
and are on this account highly valued by the Jews, though some He-
brew critics hold them in little estimation. The characters are writ-
ten with great elegance, and are perfectly square : the ink is pale ;
the pages are seldom divided into three columns ; the Psalms are
divided into hemistichs; and the Chaldee paraphrases are not inter-
lined, but written in separate columns, or are inserted in the margin
in smaller letters. Professor Tychsen speaks in high terms of the
caligraphy of the Spanish manuscripts. As the Spanish monks ex-
celled in that art, he thinks the Jews, who abounded in Spain in the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries, acquired it from them, and he ap-
peals to manuscripts which he had seen, where the letters are through-
out so equal, that the whole has the appearance of print. 1
i Tychsen, Tentamen de variis Cod. Heb. MSS, pp. 302303*
Gr 3
86 On tlie Hebrew Manuscripts [Part I. Ch>
2. The Oriental Manuscripts are nearly the same as the Spanish
manuscripts, and may be referred to the same class.
3. The German Manuscripts are written with less elegance than
the Spanish codices : their characters are more rudely formed ; the
initial letters are generally larger than the rest, and ornamented ;
the ink is very black. They do not follow the Masoretic notation,
and frequently vary from the Masoretic manuscripts, exhibiting im-
portant readings that are not to be found in the Spanish manuscripts,
but which agree with the Samaritan text of the Pentateuch, and with
the antient versions. The Chaldee paraphrases are inserted in al-
ternate verses. This class of manuscripts is little esteemed by the
Jews, but most highly valued by biblical critics.
4. The Italian Manuscripts hold a middle place .between the
Spanish and German codices, and sometimes have a nearer affinity
to one class than to the other, both in the shape of the Hebrew
characters, and also as it respects their adherence to or neglect of
the Masoretic system. M. Bruns 3 the able assistant of Dr. Kenni-
cott in collating Hebrew manuscripts, has given engraved specimens
of the Spanish, German, and Italian manuscripts, in his edition of
Dr. K/s Dissertatio Generalis (8vo. Brunswick, 1783); and Professor
Tychsen has given fourteen Hebrew alphabets, of various ages and
countries, at the end of his Tentamen de variis Codicum Hebrseo-
rum Vet. Test. MSS. Generibus. Antient and unpointed Hebrew
manuscripts, written for the use of the synagogues, and those Maso-
retic Spanish exemplars, which have been transcribed by a learned
person, and for a learned person, from some famous and correct
copy, are preferred by M. De Rossi to the copies written for pri-
vate use, or even for the synagogue, from Masoretic exemplars, of
which last the number is very great. But M. Bauer pronounces
those manuscripts to be the best, whose various lections are most fre-
quently confirmed by the antient versions, especially by the Alexan-
drian and Syriac, and also by the Samaritan Pentateuch and version. x
VIU. M. De Rossi has divided Hebrew manuscripts into three
classes, viz. 1. More antient^ or those written before the twelfth cen-
tury ; 2. Antient, or those written in the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries ; 3. More recent, or those written at the end of the four-
teenth, or at the beginning of the fifteenth century. The most re-
cent, or those written since the fifteenth century, which are very
numerous, and are those found in the synagogues, he pronounces to
be of little or no use, unless it can be proved that they have been
transcribed from antient apographs. The total number of Hebrew
manuscripts collated by Dr. Kennicott for his critical edition of the
Hebrew Bible is about six hundred and thirty. The total number
collated by M. De Rossi for his Collection of Various Readino-s,
is four hundred and seventy-nine manuscripts, besides two hundred
Walton, Prolegpm. c. iv. 112. pp. 171184. cc. vii. yiii. -pp. 225331. edit
Dathu. Carpzov. Cntica Sacra, pp. 283-387. Dr. Kennicott, diss. i. pp.313 317 ".
also his Dissertatio Generalis, passim. Jahn, Introd. ad Vet. Fcedus, pp' 1 53-1] 70'
Bauer, Critfca Sacra, pp. 215-226. 343-407. De Rossi. Var. Lect. torn, i Prole-
gonu xi, xix. pp, jj, j y.rzz.
III. Sect. L] Of the Old Testament. 7-
and eighty-eight printed editions. The following are the most
antient manuscripts collated by Dr. Kennicott.
1. The CODEX LAUDIANUS, A. 172 and 162, and numbered 1. in Dr,
Kennicott's list of Hebrew manuscripts. Though now in two folio parts,
it is evident that they originally formed only one volume : each part con-
sists of quinquernions, or gatherings of five sheets or ten leaves, and at
the bottom of every tenth leaf is a catch-word beginning the next leaf,
which is the first of the succeeding gathering of ten leaves. But at
the end of the first part or volume, there is pasted on, one leaf of the
next quinquernion, completing the book of Deuteronomy ; so that this
volume concludes with five sheets and one leaf over. And the first ga-
thering in the second volume consists of only four sheets and one leaf,
which last is likewise pasted on, for want of its fellow-leaf. This manu-
script is written on vellum, according to Dr. Kennicott, in the Spanish
character, but in the opinion of Dr, Bruns it is in the Italic character, to ;
which M. De Rossi assents. The letters, which are moderately large,
are plain, simple, and elegant, but universally unadorned ; and they were
originally written without points, as is evident from the different colour
of the ink in the letters and in the points. Some of the letters, having
become obliterated by the lapse of ages, have been written over a second
time ; and though such places were re-written in the same strong cha-
racter, yet many of the words were becoming a second time invisible,
when collated by Dr. K. This eminent critic assigns it to the tenth cen-
tury, but De Rossi refers it to the eleventh. The Laudian manuscript
begins with Gen. xxvii. 31. : it contains fourteen thousand variations from
Vander Hooght's edition of the Hebrew Bible. More than two thousand
are found in the Pentateuch, which confirm the Septuagint Greek ver-
sion in one hundred and nine various readings ; the Syriac, in ninety-
eight ; the Arabic, in eighty-two ; the Vulgate or Latin Version, in eighty-
eight ; and the Chaldee Paraphrase, in forty-two : it also agrees with the
Samaritan Pentateuch against the printed Hebrew, in seven hundred in-
stances. What renders this manuscript the more valuable is, that it pre-
serves a word of great importance for understanding 2 Sam, xxiii. 3 ?
which word is confirmed by the Greek version, and thus recovers to us
a prophecy of the Messiah. ]
2. The CODEX CARLSRUHENSIS 1. (No. 154<. of Dr. Kennicott's list of
manuscripts,) formerly belonged to the celebrated and learned Reuehlin,
whose efforts contributed so much towards the revival of literature in the
fifteenth century. This manuscript is now preserved in the public library
at Carlsruhe, and is the oldest that has a certain date. It is in square
folio, and was written in the year of the world 4866, corresponding with
1106 of our sera. It contains the Prophets with the Targuni.
3. The CODEX VIENNTB (No. 590. of Kennicott) contains the Prophets
and Hagiographa. It is written on vellum in folio, and if the date in its
subscription be correct (A.D. 1018 or 1019), it is more antient than the
preceding, 'Bruns collected two hundred important various readings from
this manuscript. The points have been added by a later hand. Accord-
ing to Adler's enumeration, it consists of four hundred and seventy-one
leaves, and two columns, each column containing twenty-one lines.
i Kennicott, Dissert. I. pp. 315 319- Dissert, II. pp. 533,534, Biblia Hcbraica,
torn. ii. Dissert. Oeneralis, pp. 70, 71. De Eossi, Variw Lcctioncs, torn. i. Proleg.
p. zix*
G 4-
$3 On the Hebrew Manuscripts [Part I. Ch.
4. The CODEX CJESENJE, in the Malatesta Library at Bologna (No. 536.
of Kennicott), is a folio manuscript written on vellum, in the German
character, towards the end of the eleventh century. It contains the Pen-
tateuch, the Haphtaroth or sections of the Prophetical Books, and the
Megilloth or five Books of Canticles, or the Song of Solomon, Ruth, the
Lamentations of Jeremiah, Ecclesiastes, and Esther. De Eossi pronounces
it to be a most antient and valuable manuscript, and states that in its mar-
gin are inserted some various readings of still more antient manuscripts. l
5. The CODEX FLORENTINUS 2. (No. 162. of Kennicott) is written on
vellum, in quarto, in a square Spanish character, with points, towards the
end of the eleventh, or at the latest, in the beginning of the twelfth cen-
tury. It contains the books of Joshua, Judges, and Samuel. Very many
of the letters, which were obliterated by time, have been renewed by a
later hand.
6. The CODEX MEDIOLANENSIS, 9. (193. of Kennicott) is written on
vellum, in, octavo, in the German character, towards the close of the
twelfth century. It has neither the points nor the Masora. This manu-
script comprises the Pentateuch ; the beginning of the book of Genesis, and
the end of Leviticus and Deuteronomy, have been written by a later hand.
Both erasures and alterations occur in this manuscript, and sometimes a
worse reading is substituted in palace of one that is preferable. Never-
theless it contains many good various readings.
7. The CODJEX NOHIMBERGENSIS 4. (201. of Kennicott) is a folio manu-
script, written on thin vellum, in the German character, and containing
the Prophets and Hagiographa. It" is mutilated in various parts. It is of
great antiquity, and from the similarity of its character to that of the Codex
Carlsruhensis, both Dr. Kennicott and M* De Rossi assign it to the be-
ginning of the twelfth century.
8. The CODEX PARISIENSIS 27- (Regius 29. 210. of Kennicott) is a
quarto manuscript of the entire Bible, written on vellum, in an elegant
Italic character. The initial words are, with few exceptions, of the same
size as the rest. The Masora and Keri are both wanting; and the Megilloth
precede the books of Chronicles. It is highly valued by Kennicott and
De Rossi, who refer it also to the beginning of the twelfth century.
9. Coeval with the preceding is the CODEX REGIOMONTANUS 2. (224?.
* of Kennicottg) written in the Italic character, in small folio. This manuscript
contains the Prophets and the Hagiographa, but it is mutilated in various
places. The initial letters are larger than the others, and three of the
poetical books are written in hemistichg.
10. To the beginning of the twelfth century likewise is to be referred
the CODEX PARISIENSIS 24. (San-Germanensis 2. No. 366. of Kennicott) :
it is written on vellum, in large quarto. It is imperfect from Jer. xxix.19.
to xxxviii. 2. ; and from Hosea iv. 4?. to Amos vi. 12. Isaiah follows Ezekiel
according to the Talmudical Canon. 3
The following are among the most antient of the manuscripts in
the possession of the late M. De Rossi., and collated by him, viz.
1. The Codex, by him numbered 634-., which is in quarto. It contains
a fragment of the books of Leviticus and Numbers, from Levit. xxi. 19-
to Numb. i.50. ; and exhibits every mark of the remotest antiquity. The
vellum on which it is written is decayed by age ; the character is inter-
mediate, or Italic, approaching to that of the German manuscripts.
The letters are all of an uniform size ; there is no trace of the Masora, or
T t)e Eossi, torn. i. Proleg. p. Lxxxrri.
* Kennicott, Dissertatio Generalis, pp. 85. S7 y 88, 89. 98. 104.
III. Sect. L] Of the Old Testament. 89
of any Masoretic notes, nor is any space left before the larger sections;
though sometimes, as in other very antient manuscripts, a few points are
inserted between the words. M. De Rossi assigns this manuscript to the
eighth century.
2. A manuscript of the Pentateuch (No. 503.), in quarto, and on vellum,
containing from Gen. xii. 44. to Deut. xv. 12. It is composed of leaves
of various ages, the most antient of which are of the ninth or tenth cen-
tury. The character is semi-rabbinical, rude, and confessedly very antient.
Points occur, in some of the more antient leaves, in the writing of the ori-
ginal copyist, but sometimes they are wanting. There are no traces of
the Masora or of the Masoretic notes, and sometimes no space at all before
the larger sections. It frequently agrees with the Samaritan text and
antient versions.
3. A manuscript of the Pentateuch (No. 10,), with the Targum and
Megilloth, It is written in the German character, on vellum, and in
quarto, towards the end of the eleventh or in the beginning of the twelfth
century. The Masora is absent. The character, which is defaced by
time, is rudely formed, and the initial letters are larger than the rest.
Coeval with this manuscript is,
4. A manuscript of the book of Job, in quarto, also on vellum, and in
the German character. It is one of the most valuable manuscripts of that
book. The pages are divided into two columns, the lines being of un-
equal length.
5- A manuscript of the Hagiographa (No. 379.), the size, character, and
date of which correspond with the preceding. It begins with PsaKxlix.15*
and ends with Neh. xl. 4. The Masora and Ken are absent ; and the
poetical books are divided into hemistichs.
6. A manuscript of the Pentateuch (No. 611.)> fl vellum, in octavo,
and written in the German character, approaching somewhat to the
Spanish, towards the close of the eleventh, or in the commencement of
the twelfth century. The ink is frequently faded by age ,* there are no
traces of the Masora; the Keri are very rarely to be seen, and the initial
letters are larger than the others. There are frequent omissions in the
text, which are supplied in the margin. 1
Dr. Kennicott states that almost all the Hebrew manuscripts of
the Old Testament, at present known to be extant, were written
between the years ]000 and 1457, whence he infers that all the ma-
nuscripts written before the years 700 or 800 were destroyed by some
decree of the Jewish senate, on account of their many differences
from the copies then declared genuine. This circumstance is also
alleged by Bishop Walton, as the reason why we have so few exem-
plars of the age of 600 years, and why even the copies of 700 or 800
years are very rare.
IX, jft was long a desideratum with biblical scholars to obtain the
Hebrew Scriptures from the Jews who are settled in India and other
parts of the East. It was reasonably supposed, that, as these Jews
had been for so many ages separated from their brethren in the west,
their manuscripts might contain a text derived from the autographs
of the sacred writers, by a channel independent of that through which
the text of our printed Bibles has been transmitted to us. Dr. Kenni-
cott was very anxious to obtain a copy, or at least a collation of a ma-
1 De liossi, Vai% kcct, torn, i, Proleg, pp, OETJT, cxu. xcrui. cm. cnir*
90 On the Hebrew Manuscripts [Part I. Ch.
nuscript from India or China, for his edition of the Hebrew Bible, in
the expectation that it would exhibit important variations from the
Masoretic editions; but he was unsuccessful in his endeavours to
procure it 1 9 and the honour of first bringing an Indian manuscript of
the Hebrew Scriptures into Europe was reserved for the late Rev.
Dr. Buchanan.
Among the biblical manuscripts brought from India by this learned
and pious divine, and which are now deposited in the public library
at Cambridge, there is a roll of the Pentateuch, which he procured
from the black Jews in Malabar 2 , who (there is strong reason to be-
lieve) are a part of the remains of the first dispersion of that nation by
Nebuchadnezzar. The date of this manuscript cannot now be ascer-
tained ; but its text is supposed to be derived from those copies which
their ancestors brought with them into India. Those Jews, on being
interrogated, could give no precise account of it : some replied, that
it came originally from Senna in Arabia; others of them said, it was
brought from Cashmir. The Cabul Jews, who travel annually into
the interior of China, remarked, that in some synagogues the Law is
still found written on a roll of leather ; not on vellum, but on a soft
flexible leather, made of goat-skins, and dyed red. It is evident that
the Jews, in the time of Moses, had the art of preparing and dyeing
skins ; for rams' skins dyed red, made a part of the covering for the
tabernacle (Exod. xxvi. 14.); and it is not improbable, that the very
autograph of the Law, written by the hand of Moses, was written on
skins so prepared. The antient rules prescribed to the Jewish scribes
direct, that the Law be so written, provided it be done on the skins
of clean animals, such as sheep, goat, or calf-skins : therefore this MS.,
and many others in the hands of the Jews, agree in the same as an
antient practice. The Cabul Jews, above noticed, show that copies
of the Law, written on leather skins, are to be found among their
people in India and China ; and hence we have no doubt, that such
are copies of very antient MSS. 3 The Cambridge Roll, or Indian
1 According to the information collected from various sources, by Professor Bauer, it
does not appear that the manuscripts of the Chinese Jews are of any remote antiquity, or
are calculated to afford any assistance to biblical critics. Although Jews have resided in
China for many centuries, yet they have no antient manuscripts, those now in use being
subsequent to the fifteenth century. Critica Sacra, pp. 405 407, See an account of
the Hebraeo- Chinese manuscripts in Koegler's Notitia S, S. Bibliorum Judseorum in
Imperio Sinensi. Edit. 2. 8vo. Halae ad Salam, 1805. Brotier, in his edition of
Tacitus, (vol. iii. pp. 567. et $eq. } has given the best account that is extant of the Jews in
China, a colony of whom settled in that country in the first century of the Christian sera.
The reader will find an abridgment of it in Dr. Tovvuley's Illustrations of Biblical
Literature, voL i. pp. 83 89. *
2 See an account of these Jews in Dr. Buchanan's " Christian Researches," pp. 224.
et seg. 4th edit.
3 Dr. Kennicott quotes from Wolfius, that a certain Jew, named Moses Pereyra,
affirmed, he had found MS. copies of the Hebrew text in Malabar; for that the Jews,
having escaped from Titus, betook themselves through Persia to the Malabar coast, and
arrived there safe in number about eighty persons. Whence Wolfius concludes, that
great fidelity is to be attached to the Malabar MSS. The Buchanan MS. may fairly be
denominated a Malabar copy, as having been brought from those parts. Refert Moses
-Pereyra, se invenisse Manuscripta Exemplaria (Hebraei Textus) Malabarica. Tradit
Judseos, a Tito fugientes, per Persiam se ad oras Malabaricas contulisse, ibique cum
octogiiata animis salvos advenisse. Unde constat, MStis Malabaricis multum iidei tri-
buendum esse," Wolf. 4. 97, See Dr. Kennicott's Dissertation the Second, p. 532.
Oxford, 1759*
Ill Sect. I.] ^ Of the Old Testament. 91
copy of the Pentateuch, which may also be denominated Malabaric 9
is written on a roll of goat-skins dyed red 9 and was discovered by
Dr. Buchanan in the record-chest of a synagogue of the black Jews,
in the interior of Malayala, in the year 1 806. It measures forty-eight
feet in length, and in breadth about twenty-two inches, or a Jewish
cubit. The book of Leviticus and the greater part of the book of
Deuteronomy are wanting. It appears, from calculation, that the
original length of the roll was not less than ninety English feet. In
its present condition it consists of thirty-seven skins ; contains one
hundred and seventeen columns of writing perfectly clear and legible;
and exhibits (as the subjoined fac-simile of Deut. iv. 1, 2. will show)
a noble specimen of the manner and form of the most antient Hebrew
manuscripts among the Jews.
The columns are a palm of four inches in breadth, and contain from
forty to fifty lines each, which are written without vowel points, and
in all other respects according to the rules prescribed to the Jewish
scribes or copyists. As some of the skins appear more decayed than
others, and the text is evidently not all written by the same hand,
Mr. Yeates (from whose Collation of this MS. the present account is
abridged, and to whom the author is indebted for the preceding fac-
simile,) is of opinion, that the roll itself comprises the fragments of
at least three different rolls, of one common material, viz. dyed goat-
skin, and exhibits three different specimens of writing. The old skins
have been strengthened by patches of parchment on the back; and
in one place four words have been renewed by the same supply. The
text is written in the square character, and without the vowel points
and accents ; and the margin of the columns is every where plain,
and free from writing of any sort. He has diligently examined and
collated this manuscript with the printed text of Vander Hooghf s
edition of the Hebrew Bible ; and the result of his investigation is,
that the amount of variations in the whole does not exceed,/or/j/, and
that none of them are found to differ from the common reading as to
the sense and interpretation of the text, but are merely additions or
omissions of a jod or vau letter, expressing such words to befall or
deficient, according to the known usage of the Hebrew tongue. But
even this small number of readings was considerably reduced, when
compared with the text of Athias's edition, printed at Amsterdam in
92 Hebrew MSS. of the Old Testament. [Part I. Cb;
1661 ; so that the integrity of the Hebrew text is Confirmed by this
valuable manuscript so far as it goes, and its testimony is unques-
tionably important. Four readings are peculiar to this copy, which
are not to be found in Dr. Kennicott's edition of the Hebrew Bible ;
and many minute Masoretical distinctions, chiefly relative to the
formation of the letters in certain words, show that the Masora of the
Eastern Jews has its peculiarities not common with that of the 1 Western
Jews : whence it is certainly determined that the present roll is not
a copy from any exemplar of the Jews in Europe ; for no other syna-
o-oo-ue rolls known in Europe are observed to have the same charac-
teristics, at least as far as appears from any description of Hebrew
manuscripts that is extant. }
With respect to the several sorts of skins and hand-writing, the
answer of some Indian Jews, when interrogated concerning this MS.,
is worthy of remark. By one account, it was brought from Senna
in Arabia ; and by another account, it came from Cashmir ; which
two accounts are cleared up on an examination of the MS., since,
part of it being composed of brown skins, and the writing very simi-
lar to that seen in rolls of Arabian and African extraction, there is
a possibility that such part is the fragment of an Arabian or African
MS., as those Jews relate : and the other account, viz.- that it was
brought from Cashmir, may also be equally true; since that part
consisting of red skins so well corresponds with their own description
of copies found in the synagogues of the Eastern Jews. The con-
sideration of this point attaches still greater consequences to the roll
itself, which, as it is found to consist of fragments of copies purely
Oriental, and seemingly unconnected with the Western Jewish
copies, we may now conclude the same to be ample specimens of
copies in those parts of the world. It is true, indeed, that a great
part of the text is wanting, and the whole book of Leviticus ; yet,
notwithstanding the large deficencies of the MS., it ought to be a
satisfaction to know, that herein are ample specimens of at least
three antient copies of the Pentateuch, whose testimony is found to
unite in the integrity and pure conservation of the Sacred Text, ac-
knowledged by Christians and Jews in these parts of the world." 2
The following testimony of Bishop Marsh to the value of the
Codex Malabaricus is too valuable to be omitted : "A manuscript
Roll of the Hebrew Pentateuch, apparently of some antiquity, and
found among the Black Jews in the interior of India, must be re-
garded at least as a literary curiosity, deserving the attention of the
learned in general. And as this manuscript appears, on comparison,
to have no important deviation from our common printed Hebrew-
text, it is of still greater value to a theologian, as it affords an addi-
tional argument for the integrity of the Pentateuch. The Hebrew
manuscripts of the Pentateuch, preserved in the West of Europe,
though equally derived, with the Hebrew manuscripts preserved in
India, from the autograph of Moses, must have descended from it
through very different channels ; and therefore the close agreement
of the former with the latter is a proof, that they have preserved the
i See Mr. Yeates's Collation of an Indian Copy of the Pentateuch, pp. 2,3. 6, 7*
* Ibid, p, 8.
III. Sect. II.] Manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch. 93
original text in great purity, since the circumstances, under which
the MS. was found, forbid the explanation of that agreement on the
principle of any immediate connexion. It is true that, as this manu-
script (or rather the three fragments of which this manuscript is
composed) was probably written much later than the time when the
Masoretic text was established by the learned Jews of Tiberias, it
may have been wholly derived from that Masoretic text : and in this
case it would afford only an argument,, that the Masoretic text had
preserved its integrity, and would not affect the question, whether
the Masoretic text itself were an accurate representative of the
Mosaic autograph. But, on the other hand, as the very peculiar
circumstances, under which the manuscript was found, render it at
least possible, that the influence of the Masora, which was extended
to the African and European Hebrew manuscripts by the settlement
of the most distinguished Oriental Jews in Africa and Spain, never
reached the mountainous district in the South of India ; as it is pos-
sible, that the text of the manuscript in question was derived from
manuscripts anterior to the establishment of the Masora, manuscripts
even which might have regulated the learned Jews of Tiberias in
the formation of their own text, the manuscript appears for these
reasons to merit particular attention/' l Such being the value of
this precious manuscript, Mr. Yeates has conferred a great service
on the biblical student by publishing his collation, of which future
editors of the Hebrew Bible will doubtless avail themselves.
In the seventh and following volumes of the Classical Journal
there is a catalogue of the biblical, biblico- oriental, and classical
manuscripts at present existing in the various public libraries in
Great Britain*
SECTION II.
ON THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH.
I. Origin of the Samaritans* II. Account of the Samaritan Pentateuch.
Manuscripts of it. III. Variations of the Samaritan Pentateuch
from the Hebrew* IV. Versions of the Samaritan Pentateuch.
I. ORIGIN OF THE SAMARITANS.
The Samaritans being generally considered as a Jewish sect, the
specification of their tenets properly belongs to the third volume of
this work. At present, it will be sufficient to remark that they were
descended from an intermixture of the ten tribes with the Gentile
nations. This origin rendered them odious to the Jews, who refused'
to acknowledge them as Jewish citizens, or to permit them to assist
in rebuilding the Temple, after their return from the Babylonish
captivity. In consequence of this rejection, as well as of other causes
of dissension, the Samaritans erected a temple on Mount Gerizim,
and instituted sacrifices according to the prescriptions of the Mosaic
law. Hence arose that inveterate schism and enmity between the
two nations, so frequently mentioned or alluded to in the New Tes-
tament. The Samaritans (who still exist but are greatly reduced in
i See Yeates's Collation Of an Indian Copy of the Pentateuch, &c. pp. 40, 41.
9$ Manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch. [Part I. Ch.
numbers) reject all the sacred books of the Jews except the PENTA-
TEUCH, or five books of Moses. Of this they preserve copies in the
antient Hebrew characters : which as there has been no friendly
intercourse between them and the Jews since the Babylonish capti-
vity, there can be no doubt were the same that were in use befoi'e
that event, though subject to such variations as will always be occa-
sioned by frequent transcribing. And so inconsiderable are the vari-
ations from our present copies (which were those of the Jews), that
by this means we have a proof that those important books have been
preserved uncorrupted for the space of nearly three thousand years,
so as to leave no room to doubt that they are the same which were
actually written by Moses.
II. ACCOUNT of the Samaritan Pentateuch.
Although the Samaritan Pentateuch was known to and cited by
Eusebius, Cyril of Alexandria, Procopius of Gaza, Diodorus of
Tarsus, Jerome, Syncellus, and other antient fathers, yet it after-
wards fell into oblivion for upwards of a thousand years, so that its
very existence began to be questioned. Joseph Scaliger was the first
who excited the attention of learned men to this valuable relic of an-
tiquity ; and M, Peiresc procured a copy from Egypt, which, together
with the ship that brought it, was unfortunately captured by pirates.
More successful was the venerable Archbishop Usher, who procured
six copies from the East; and from another copy, purchased by
Pietro della Valle for M, de Sancy, (then ambassador from France
to Constantinople, and afterwards Archbishop of St. Maloes,) Father
Morinus printed the Samaritan Pentateuch, for the first time, in the
Paris Polyglott. This was afterwards reprinted in the London Po-
lyglott by Bishop Walton, who corrected it from three manuscripts
which had formerly belonged to Archbishop Usher. A neat edition
of this Pentateuch, in Hebrew characters, was edited by Dr. Blayney,
Jn octavo, Oxford, 1790.
Seventeen manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch are known to
be extant, of which Dr. Kennicott has given a minute description.
Six of these manuscripts are in the Bodleian Library at Oxford, and
one in the Cotton Library in the British Museum: concerning a few of
the most valuable of these, the following particulars may not be unac-
ceptable. They are numbered according to Dr. Kennicott's notation.
1. Cod. 127- is preserved in the British Museum. (Bibl. Cotton.
Claudius* B. 8.) It is one of the six MSS. procured by Archbishop
Usher, by whom it was presented to Sir Robert Cotton. This
very valuable manuscript is complete, and was transcribed entirely
by one hand, on two hundred and fifty-four pages of vellum. It is
in an excellent state of preservation, a leaf of fine paper having
been carefully placed between every two leaves of the vellum. This
MS. was written. A. D. 1 362.
2. Cod. 62. is preserved in the Bodleian Library at Oxford ; and
was also purchased by Archbishop -Usher, from whose heirs the
curators of that library bought it, with many other MSS. This
manuscript is in large quarto, and contains an Arabic version in
Samaritan letters, placed in a column parallel to the Samaritan text.
Unhappily there are many cWfn^iu it. Dr Kennicott attributes a
III. Sect, II.] Manuscripts of the Samaritan Pentateuch. . 95
high value to this manuscript, which was written about the middle
of the thirteenth century.
Cod. 197. is a most valuable manuscript in the Ambrosian Li-
brary at Milan, which was collated for Dr. Kennicott by Dr. Branca,
who is of opinion that it is certainly not later than the tenth century.
It is imperfect in many places ; and is very beautifully written on ex**
tremely thin vellum, in red characters.
Cod. 363. (No. 1. of the MSS. in the Library of the Oratory at
Paris,) is the celebrated manuscript bought by Pietro della Valle of
the Samaritans, in 1616, and printed by Morinus in 1631-33. It
is written throughout by one hand ; and, though no date is assigned
to it, Dr. Kennicott thinks it was written towards the close of the
eleventh century. It was collated for Dr. Kennicott by Dr. Bruns,
in some select passages. l
III. VARIATIONS of the Samaritan "Pentateuch from the Hebrew.
The celebrated critic, Le Clerc 3 , has instituted a minute compa-
rison of the Samaritan Pentateuch with the Hebrew text ; and has,
with much accuracy and labour, collected those passages in which
he is of opinion that the former is more or less correct than the
latter. For instance
1. The Samaritan text appears to be more correct than^the Hebretv, in
Gen. ii. 4. vii. 2. xix. 19. xx. 2. xxiii. 16. xxiv. 14. xlix. 10, 11. 1.26,
Exod.i. 2. iv.2.
2. It is expressed more conformably to analogy, in Gen. xxxi.39- xxxv.
26. xxxvii. 17- xli, 34% 43. xlvii. 3. Deut. xxxii. 5.
3. It has glosses and additions in Gen. xxix. 15- xxx. 36. xli. 16. Exod.
vii. 18. viii. 23. ix. 5. xxi.20- xxii.5. xxiii. 10. xxxii. 9. Lev. i. 10. xvii,
4. Deut.v. 21.
4. It appears to have been altered by a critical hand, in Gen. ii. 2, iv. 10.
ix.5. x. 19. xi.21. xviii.3. xix. 12. xx. 16- xxiv. 38. 55. xxxv.7. xxxvi.
6. xli. 50. Exod.i. 5. xiii. 6. xv. 5. Num.xxii. 32.
5. It is more full than the Hebrew text, in Gen.v. 8. xi. 31. xix. 9.
xxvii. 34. xxxix. 4. xliiu25. Exod. xii. 40. xl. 17- Num. iv. 14. Deut.
xx. 16-
6. It is defective in Gen. xx. 16. and xxv. 14.
It agrees tvith the Septuaginl version in Gen. iv. 8. xix. 12. xx. 16.
xxiii. 2. xxiv. 55. 62. xxvi. 18. xxix. 27. xxxv.29. xxxix. 8. xli. 16. 43.
xliii. 26. xlix. 26. Exod. viii. 3. and in many other passages. Though,
7. // sometimes varies from the Septuagint, as in Gen.i. 7. v. 29. viii.
3.7. xlix. 22. Num. xxii. 4.
The differences between the Samaritan and Hebrew Pentateuchs
may be accounted for, by the usual sources of various readings, viz.
the negligence of copyists, introduction of glosses from the margin
into the text, the confounding of similar letters, the transposition of
letters, the addition of explanatory words, &c. The Samaritan
Pentateuch, however, is of great use and authority in establishing
correct readings: in many instances it agrees remarkably with the
Greek Septuagint, and it contains numerous and excellent various
lections, which are in every respect preferable to the received Ma-
i Kennicott, Diss. II. pp. 538540., and Diss. Gen. pp. 81. 76. 88. 98.
a Comment, in Pentateuch, Index, ii. SeQ also some additional observations on the
differences between the Samaritan and Hebrew Pentateuchs, iu Dr. Kennicott's Remarks
on Select Passages in the Old Testament, pp. 43 47.
96 Versions of the Samaritan Pentateuch. [Part I. Ch.
soretic readings, and are further confirmed by the agreement of
other antient versions.
The most material variations between the Samaritan Pentateuch
and the Hebrew, which affect the authority of the former, occur,
first, in the prolongation of the patriarchal generations ; and,
secondly, in the alteration of Ebal into Gerizim (Deut. xxvii.), in
order to support their separation from the Jews. The chronology
of the Samaritan Pentateuch has been satisfactorily vindicated by
the Rev. Dr. Hales, whose arguments, however, will not admit of
abridgment 1 ; and with regard to the charge of altering the Pen-
tateuch, it has been shown by Dr. Kennicott, from a consideration
of the character of the Samaritans, their known reverence for the
law, our Lord's silence on the subject in his memorable conversation
with the woman of Samaria, and from various other topics ; that
what almost all biblical critics have hitherto considered as a wilful
corruption by the Samaritans, is in all probability the true reading,
and that the corruption is to be charged on the Jews themselves.
In judging therefore of the genuineness of a reading, we are not to
declare absolutely for one of these Pentateuchs against the other,
but to prefer the true readings in both. cc One antient copy," Dr.
Kennicott remarks, with equal truth and justice, "has been received
from the Jews, and we are truly thankful for it : another antient
copy is offered by the Samaritans; let us thankfully accept that
likewise. Both have been often transcribed; both therefore may
contain errors. They differ in many instances, therefore the errors
must be many. Let the two parties be heard without prejudice ;
let their evidences be weighed with impartiality; and let the genuine
words of Moses be ascertained by their joint assistance. Let the
variations of all the manuscripts on each side be carefully collected ;
and then critically examined by the context and the antient versions.
If the Samaritan copy should be found in some places to correct the
Hebrew, yet will the Hebrew copy in other places correct the Sa-
maritan. Each copy therefore is invaluable; each copy therefore
demands our pious veneration, and attentive study. The Penta-
teuch will never be understood perfectly, till we admit the authority
Of BOTH. 2
IV. VERSIONS of the -Samaritan Pentateuch.
Of the Samaritan Pentateuch two versions are extant ; one in the
proper Samaritan dialect, which is usually termed the Samaritan
version, and another in Arabic.
1. The Samaritan version was made in Samaritan characters, from
the Hebrseo -Samaritan text into the Samaritan dialect, which is
intermediate between the Hebrew and the Aramsean languages.
This version is of great antiquity, having been made at least before
the time of Origen, and not improbably before the commencement
of the Christian aera. The author of the Samaritan version is un-
known, but he has in general adhered very closely and faithfully to
the original text; so that this version as almost exactly the counter-
part of the original Hebrew-Samaritan codex with all its various
1 Analysis of Chronology, vol. I. pp. 80, et sea.
* Kennicott, Diss, ii. pp. 20165.
III. Sect. III.] On Gn^eelt Manuscripts. 97
readings. This shows, in a degree, really surprising, how very
carefully and accurately the Hebrew Pentateuch has been copied
and preserved by the Samaritans, from the antient times in which
their version was made. *
2. The Arabic version of the Samaritan Pentateuch is also extant
in Samaritan characters, and was executed by Aba Said, A.D, 1070,
in order to supplant the Arabic translation of the Jewish Rabbi,
Saadia Gaon, which had till that time been in use among the Sama-
ritans. Abu Said has very closely followed the Samaritan Pen-
tateuch, whose readings he expresses, even where the latter differs
from the Hebrew text : in some instances, however, both Bishop
Walton and Bauer have remarked, that he has borrowed from the
Arabic version of Saadia. On account of the paucity of manuscripts
of the original Samaritan Pentateuch, Bauer thinks this version will
be found of great use in correcting its text. Some specimens of it
have been published by Dr. Durell in the " Hebrew Text of the
Parallel Prophecies of Jacob relating to the Twelve Tribes," &c. (Ox-
ford, 1763, 4to.) and before him by Castell in the fourth volume of
the London Polyglott; also by Hwiid, at Rome, in 1780, in 8vo.,
and by Paulus, at Jena, in 1739, in 8vo. 2
SECTION III.
ON THE MANUSCRIPTS OF THE GREEK SCRIPTURES.
1. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON GREEK MANUSCRIPTS.
I. On luhat Materials tvritten. II. Form of Letters.^- III. Abbreviations.
IV. Codices Palimpsesti or Rescript L V. Account of the different
Families, Recensions, or Editions of Manuscripts of the New Testa-
inent. 1. The System of Dr. Griesbach and Michaelis 2. Of M.
Matthaii. S. Of Mr*. Nolan. . Of Prof. Hug. 5. Of Prof.
Scholz. VI. On the Fcedus cum Grcecis, or Coincidence between many
Greek Manuscripts and the Vulgate Latin Version.
I. I HE Greek manuscripts, which have descended to our time, are
written either on vellum or on paper; and their external form and
condition vary, like the manuscripts of other antient authors. The
vellum is either purple-coloured or of its natural hue, and is either
thick or thin. Manuscripts on very thin vellum were always held
in the highest esteem. The paper also is either made of cotton, or
the common sort manufactured from linen, and is either glazed, or
laid (as it is technically termed), that is, of the ordinary roughness.
Not more than six manuscript fragments on purple vellum are known
to be extant ; they are described in the following sections of this
chapter. The Codex Claromontamis, of which a brief notice is also
given in a subsequent page, is written on very thin vellum. All
1 North American Review, New Series, vol. xxii* p. 313.
Bp. Walton, Proleg. c. xi. J0*-21. pp. 527553, Carpzov. Critica Sacra,
pp. 585 6^0. Lcubdcn, 1'hilologus Hebranis, pp. 59 67. Bauer, Critica Sacra,
pp. 325335, Muntinghc, Expositio Critices Veteris Fcederis, pp. 148, 149.
VOL, II. H
98 General Observations [Part I. Ch, III.
manuscripts on paper are of a much later date ; those on cotton paper
being posterior to the ninth century, and those on linen subsequent
to the twelfth century ; and if the paper be of a very ordinary qua-
lity, Wetstein pronounces them to have been written in Italy, in the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
II. The letters are either capital (which in the time of Jerome
were called uncial, i. e, initial) or cursive, i. e. small ; the capital let-
ters, again, are of two kinds, either unadorned and simple, and made
with straight thin strokes, or thicker, uneven, and angular. Some
of them are supported on a sort of base, while others are decorated,
or rather burthened with various tops. As letters of the first kind
are generally seen on antient Greek monuments, while those of the
last resemble the paintings of semi-barbarous times, manuscripts
written with the former are generally supposed to be as old as the
fifth century, and those written with the latter are supposed to be
posterior to the ninth century. Greek manuscripts were usually
written in capital letters till the seventh century, and mostly without
any divisions of words ; and capitals were in general use until the
eighth .century, and some even so late as the ninth ; but there is a
strikingtdifference in the forms of the letters after the seventh century.
Great Alterations took place in the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries:
the Greek letters in the manuscripts copied by the Latins in the ninth
century, are by no means regular ; the , e, and y, being inflected
like the , <?, and y, of the Latin alphabet. Towards the close of
the tenth century, small or cursive letters were generally adopted ;
and Greek manuscripts written in and since the eleventh century are
in small letters, and greatly resemble each other, though some few
exceptions occur to the contrary. Flourished letters rarely occur in
Greek manuscripts of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth cen-
turies. 1 The fac-similes of the Alexandrian and other manuscripts,
given in the subsequent pages of this work, will furnish the reader
with a tolerably correct idea of the various styles of Greek writing
which obtained at different periods between the sixth and the four-
teenth centuries.
The most antient manuscripts are written without accents, spirits,
9r any separation of the words ; nor was it until after the ninth
century that the copyists began to leave spaces between the words.
Michaelis, after Wetstein, ascribes the insertion of accents to Eutlm-
lius, bishop of Sulca in Egypt, A.D. 4-58. 2
III. Nearly the same mode of spelling obtains in antient manu-
scripts which prevails in Greek printed books; but, ever) in the
earliest manuscripts, we meet with some words that are abbreviated
by putting the first and last letters, and sometimes also the middle
letter^ fbrjuijen tire word, and drawing a line over the top : thus
0C ? KC, 1C, XC, TS, 2HP, 1~HA, or I2HA, riSX] ITHP, MHP, OTNQ2,
i Wetatein's Prolegomena to his edition of the Greek Testament, vol. i. pp. 1-3
Astle on the Origin of Writing, pp. GO 76. 9d edit. Wetstein lias given an alphabet from
various Greek manuscripts, and Astle has illustrated his observations with several very fine
^engravings. J
* Wetstein, Prolog, p. 73, Michaelis, vol. ii. pp. 519-524.
Sect. III. L] On Greek Manuscripts. 99
ANO2, IAHM, AAA, respectively denote @so$ God, Kvpio$ Lord,
Jesus, Xpiro? Christ, TJOJ a son, 2cor>jp Saviour, IcrparjA Israel,
spirit^ riaTTjf) father, Myj-njp mother, Oupxvo$ heaven, AvS^war
lepoycraAijjU. Jerusalem, AamS David. l At the beginning of a new
book, which always commences at the top of a page, the first three,
four, or five lines are frequently written in vermilion ; and, with the
exception of the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts, all the mo$t
antient codices now extant have the Eusebian xe$aXai& and -nrAo*,
of which we have given an account in a subsequent chapter. 2
Vey few manuscripts contain the whole either of the Old or of
the New Testament. By far the greater part have only the four
Gospels, because they were most frequently read in the churches;
others comprise only the Acts of the Apostles and the Catholic
Epistles; others, again, have the Acts, and St. Paul's Epistles; and
a very few contain the Apocalypse. Almost all of them, especially
the more antient manuscripts, are imperfect, either from the injuries
of time, or from neglect. 3
All manuscripts, the most antient not excepted, have erasures and
corrections ; which, however, were not always effected so dexter-
ously, but that the original writing may sometimes be seen. Where
these alterations have been made by the copyist of the manuscript,
(a primd maim, as it is termed,) they are preferable to those made
by later hands, or a secunda manu. These erasures were sometimes
made by drawing a line through the word, or, what is tenfold worse>.
by the penknife. But, besides these modes of obliteration, the copyist
frequently blotted out the old writing with a sponge, and wrote other
words in lieu of it : nor was this practice confined to a single letter
or word, as may be seen in the Codex Bezae.* Authentic instances
are on record, in which whole books have been thus obliterated, and
other writing has been substituted in the place of the manuscript so
blotted out : but where the writing has already faded through age,
they preserved their transcriptions without further erasure.
IV. These manuscripts are termed Codices Palimpsest i or Re script i.
Before the invention of paper, the great scarcity of parchment in
different places induced many persons to obliterate the works of
antient writers, in order to transcribe their own, or those of some
other favourite author in their place : hence, doubtless, the works of
many eminent writers have perished, and particularly those of the
greatest antiquity ;. for such, as were comparatively recent, were
transcribed, to satisfy the immediate demand ; while lhose 9 which
1 Concerning Greek Abbreviations, sec Montfuucou's Paloeographia Graca, pp. 34&
370. Mr. Astle lias also given a specimen of Greek abbreviations from two Psalters*
Ou Writing, p. 7C. plate vi,
a See Chap. IV. Sect. II pp. 16*9, 170. infra,
3 The Codex Cottonianus, for instance, when perfect, contained only the Boole of
Genesis j the Codex Ctesaraus contains only part of the same book, together with a frag-
ment of* the Gospel of St. Luke ; the Alexandrian manuscript wants the fiist twenty-four
chapters of St. Matthew's Gospel; and the Codex Bczaj contains only the four Gospels
and the Acts of the Apostles*
* Wetstt'in's Prolegomena, pp. 38. Gricsbacb has discovered the hands of fiVB
different correctors in the Codex Claromontanus. See his Symbolae Criticae, tow. ii.
pp. 3252.
H 2
100 General Observations [Part I. Ch. III.
were already dim with age, were erased. 1 . It was for a long time
thought, that this destructive practice was confined to the eleventh,
twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries, and that it chiefly pre-
vailed among the Greeks : it must, in fact, be considered as the con-
sequence of the barbarism which overspread those dark ages of ignor-
ance; but this destructive operation was likewise practised by the La-
tins, and is also of a more remote date than has usually been supposed.
In general, a Codex Rescriptus is easily known, as it rarely Imp-
pens that the former writing is so completely erased, as not to exhibit
some traces: in a few instances, both writings are legible. Many
such manuscripts are preserved in the library of the British Museum.
Montfaucon found a manuscript in the Colbert library, which had
been written about the eighth century, and originally contained the
works of St. Dionysius : new matter had been written over it, three
or four centuries afterwards, and both continued legible. 1 - 1 Mimitori
saw in the Ambrosian library a manuscript comprising the works of
the venerable Bede, the writing of which was from eight to nine
hundred years old, and which had been substituted for another up-
wards of a thousand years old. Notwithstanding the efforts which
had been made to erase the latter, some phrases could be deciphered,
which indicated it to be an antient pontifical. 3 The indefatigable
researches of signer Angelo Mai (principal keeper of the Vatican
Library at Rome) have discovered several valuable remains of bibli-
cal and classical literature in the Ambrosian Library at Milan' 1 ; and
a short account of some of the principal Codices Rescript! of the
New Testament, or of parts thereof, will be found ia the sequel of
this section.
V. The total number of manuscripts of the New Testament (whe-
ther they have been transmitted to us entire or in fragments), which
are known to have been wholly or partially collated, amounts nearly
to five hundred ; but this number forms only a small part of the
manuscripts found in public and private libraries. The result of
these collations has shown that certain manuscripts have an ivflinity
to each other, and that their text is distinguished from that of others
by characteristic marks; and eminent critics, (particularly Griosbach,
who devoted the whole of his life to sacred criticism,) alter diligently
comparing the quotations from the New Testament in the writings
of Clement of Alexandria and of Origen with those made by Turin l-
lian and Cyprian, have ascertained that, so early as the third century,
there were in existence two families^ recensions, or editions 5 of nui-
1 Peignot, Essai sur 1'Histoiro de Parchemin, pp. 83. et sctj.
a Palaiogr. Graec. pp. 231. 233. The greater part of the manuscripts on purchmout
which Montfaucon had seen, he affirms, were written on parchment, from which some
former treatise had been erased, except in those of a very antient dale. Mum. de TAcad,
de Inscript. torn. ix. p. 325.
3 Muratori. Antiq. Ital. torn. iii. diss. 43. col. 833, 834.
4 ^ See a brief notice of Signor Mai's discovery of a Codex Rescriptus of Saint Paul's
Epistles, in pp. 140, 141. infra, of the present volume.
5 Bengel expressed this relationship or affinity between manuscripts by the term family.
(Introd. adCrisin N, T. 2730.) Semler( Apparatus ad LiberaU-m Novi Tesfiununli
Interpretationera, p. 45.) and Griesbach (Symbol* Criu'caj, torn. i. p. cxviiu) use the
term recensio, recension^ that is edition, which last term is adopted by Michaelis, voh ii,
p 1 73.
Sect, III. 1.] On Greek Manuscripts. 101
nuscripts, or, in other words, two entirely different texts of the New
Testament. l Michaelis has observed that, as different countries had
different versions according to their respective languages, their ma-
nuscripts naturally resembled their respective versions, as these ver-
sions, generally speaking, were made from such manuscripts as were
in common use. Five different systems of recensions or editions
have been proposed, viz. by Griesbach and Michaelis, by Matthaei,
by Mr. Nolan, by Professor Hug, and by Professor Scholz.
1. The basis of Dr, GRTESBACH'S system is, the division of the
Greek manuscripts of the New Testament into three classes, each of
which is considered as an independent witness for the various read-
ings which it contains. The value of a reading, so far as manuscript
authority is regarded, is decided by Griesbach, not according to the
individual manuscript in which it is found, but according to the num-
ber of classes by which it is supported. The classes, under which
he arranges all the Greek manuscripts are the following; viz. 1. The
Alexandrine ; 2. The Occidental or Western ; and 3. The Byzan-
tine or Oriental, to which Michaelis has added, 4. The Edessene.
To each of these are given the appellation of recension or edition, as
we commonly say of printed books.
(1.) The first class, or ALEXANDRINE RECENSION, which is also
called the EGYPTIAN Recension, comprises those manuscripts, which,
in remarkable and characteristic readings, agree with the quotations
of the early Alexandrine writers, particularly Origen and Clement
of Alexandria. After them, this recension was adopted by 'the
Egyptian Greeks.
To this class Griesbach refers the Codex Alexandrinus 3 , noted by the
letter A., but in the epistles of Saint Paul only ; and also B> the Vatican
manuscript. To this class also Dr. Scholz refers C. ? the Codex Ephremi ;
L. the Codex Regius 62., an imperfect manuscript of the four Gospels of
the* eighth century, collated by Wetstein and Griesbach ; P. the Guelpher-
bytanus A,, a Codex Kcscriptus of the sixth century, comprising frag-
ments of the four Gospels ; Q. the Guelpherbytanus B., also a Codex
llescriptus of the same date, and containing some fragments of Luke
and John ; T. the Codex Borgiae L, containing a Greek Sahidic version,
of John vi. 28 67- vii. 6. viii. 31., executed in the fourth century;
Gricsb. 22., the Codex Regius 72., a fragment of Matt. i. 1. ii. 2., writ-
ten in the eleventh century ; Gricsb. 33., the Codex Regius 14., a muti-
lated MS. of the Old and New Testament, of the eleventh century; Griesb.
102., the Codex Medicseus, which comprises from Matt. xxiv. to Mark
viii. 1,, and the Codex Regius 305., a MS. of the thirteenth century. 3
The Alexandrine Recension is followed by the Coptico-Memphilic, Cop-
tico-Basmuric, Coptieo-Sahidic, Ethiopia, Armenian, and the Syro-Phi-
loxouian versions ; and it is the text cited by the fathers, Eusebius,
i In the second volume of Gricbbach's Symbolac Critieze (pp. 229 620,) there is a
laborious collation of the* quotations from the New Testament, made by Origen and
Clement of Alexandria, with the Vulgate* or common Greek text.
a See an account of those and of the other MSS, mentioned in this Section in pp. 115
1*57. infra* The letters and figures, above used, are those employed by Griesbach, to
denote the several manuscript* collated or consulted by him for his edition of the New
Testament. They are explained in the Prolegomena to his first volume.
3 The manuscripts in the Royal Library at Paris are generally known by the appel-
lation of Codices Itcgli*
H 5
102 General Observations [Parti. Ch. III.
Anastasius, Ammonius, Didymus, Cyril of Alexandria, Marcus, Macarius,
Cosmas Indicopleustes, Nonnuss, Isidore of Pelusium, Theodore of Pelu-
sium, and frequently also by Chrysostom.
(2,) The OCCIDENTAL or WESTERN RECENSION is that which was
adopted by the Christians of Africa (especially by Tertullian and
Cyprian ) 5 Italy, Gaul, and the west of Europe generally.
According to Griesbach, it is followed in A. the Codex Alexandrinus,
in the Acts of the Apostles, and the Catholic Epistles; and according to
Dr. Scholz, in D. the Codex Bezae or Cantabrigiensis ; in the Codex
Regius 31 4-., a MS. of the eighth century, containing Luke ix. 36 47*
and x. 12 22.; Griesb. 1. (Basileensis) ; Griesb. 13. the Codex Regius
50*, a mutilated MS. of the twelfth century, collated for Birch's edition
of the four "Gospels ; Griesb. 28. the Codex Regius 379., a MS. of the
eleventh century; Griesb. 69. the Codex Leicestrensis, and 124., the Co-
dex Vindobonensis (Lambecii 31.); Griesb. 131. the Codex Vaticanus
360, a MS. of the eleventh century, collated by Birch ; Griesb, 157. the
Codex Vaticanus 2, a MS. of the twelfth century, also collated by Birch ;
the Codex Regius 177. containing the four Gospels, with very copious
scholia, written (Dr. Scholz thinks) in the eleventh century ; and in the
Codex Regius, 375. containing lessons from the New Testament, except-
ing the Revelation, and written early in the eleventh century : in the
Gospels, it very seldom differs from the Codex Bezse, but in the Acts of
the Apostles and in the Epistles, it chiefly agrees with the Alexandrine
recension. With these manuscripts sometimes harmonise the Sahidic
Version, made in the fourth century, the Syriac Version of Jerusalem,
and the readings in the margin of the Syro-Philoxenian Version ; as also
the Ante-Hieronymian or Old Latin Versions, which were in use before
the Vulgate Version.
The Western Edition was cited by the African fathers, Tertullian, Cy-
prian, Lactantius, Victorinus, Augustine, and by the unknown author of
the book against Fulgentius the Donatist, by the Italic fathers, Zeno of
Verona, Gaudentius of Brescia, Chromatius of Aquileia, Ambrose, the
author of certain pieces which are attributed to that writer, Rufinus, the
author of the Opus Imperfectum on St. Matthew, Gregory surnamed the
Great, and Lucifer Bishop of Cagliari ; and by the Gallic fathers, Irenzeus,
Hilary, Julius Firmicus Maternus, Phcebadius (a Spaniard) bishop of
Agen, Juvencus, and by the Mozarabic Ritual. With this edition also
coincides the Vulgate Latin version, which is followed by Isidore bishop
of Seville, Remigius, Bede, Rabanus Maurus, Haymo, Anselm, Pietro
Damiani, Bernard, and all subsequent writers in communion with the
Latin church for the last thousand years, as well as by the Lectionaries,
Breviaries, Antient Missals, Acts of the Martyrs, and other ecclesiastical
books of that church. 1
J3.) Towards the end of the fourth century, and during the fifth
sixth centuries, critics have observed a text differing from the
two first, and which they call the BVZANTINE or ORIENTAL RECEN-
SION or Edition, because it was in general use at Constantinople 3 after
that city became the capital and metropolitan see of the eastern empire.
With this edition are closely allied those of the neighbouring provinces,
whose inhabitants were subject to the spiritual jurisdiction of the patriarch
of Constantinople. 2 The readings of the Byzantine Recension are those
1 Scholz, Curse Criticae in Historiam Textus Evangeliorum, pp. 27 30.
s Michaelis remarks, that the greatest number of manuscripts written on Mount Athos
are evidently of the Byzantine edition; and he thinks it probable that almost all the
Moscow manuscripts, of which M* Matthaej has given extracts, belong to this edition. As
Sect. III. J 1*] On Greek Manuscripts. 103
which are most commonly found in the KOIJ/IJ EX&OCTK, or printed Vulgate
Greek Text, and are also most numerous in the existing manuscripts
which correspond to it. Griesbach reckons upwards of one hundred
manuscripts of this class, which minutely harmonise with each other. On
account of the many alterations, that were unavoidably made In the long
interval between the fourth and fifteenth centuries, Michaelis proposes to di-
vide the Byzantine edition into antient and modern ; bin he does not^spe-
cify any criteria by whieh we can determine the boundaries between these
two classes. The Byzantine text is found in the four Gospels of the Alex-
andrian manuscript ; it was the original of the Sclavonic or old Russian ver-
sion, and was cited by Chryso&tom and Theophylact bishop of Bulgaria.
As the Peschito, or Old Syriac Version of the New Testament
differs from the three preceding recensions, Michaelis after Gries-
bach has instituted another,, which he designates,
(4.) The EDESSENE EDITION, comprehending the special Asiatic
instruments, as they were termed by Griesbach, or those Manuscripts
from which that Version was made.
Of this edition no manuscripts are extant ; which circumstance Mi-
chaelis accounts for, by the early prejudice of the Syrian literati in favour
of whatever was Grecian, and also by the wars that devastated the East
for many ages subsequent to the fifth century. But by some accident
which is difficult to be explained, manuscripts are found in the west of
Europe, accompanied even with a Latin translation, such as the Codex
Bezae, which so eminently coincide with the Old Syriac Version, that
their affinity is indisputable.
Although the readings of the Western, Alexandrine, and Edessene
editions sometimes differ, yet they very frequently harmonise with each
other. This coincidence Michaelis ascribes to their high antiquity, as
the oldest manuscripts extant belong to one of these editions, and the
translations themselves are antient, A reading confirmed by three of
them is supposed to be of the very highest authority ; yet the true read-
ing may sometimes be found only in the fourth.
Most of the Manuscripts now extant exhibit one of the texts above
described; some are composed of two or three recensions. No in-
dividual manuscript preserves any recension in a pure state; but
manuscripts are said to be of the Alexandrian or Western Recension,
as the appropriate readings of each preponderate. The margins of
these manuscripts, as well as those of the Ethiopia, Armenian, Sahi-
dic, and Syro-Philoxenian versions, and the Syriac version of Jerusa-
lem, contain the Alexandrian variations for the Western readings, or
vice versa ; and some Byzantine manuscripts have the Alexandrian
or Western various lections in their margins. l
Each of these recensions has characteristics peculiar to itself. The
Occidental or Western preserves harsh readings, Hebraisms, and
solecisms, which the Alexandrine has exchanged for readings more
the valuable manuscripts collected by the late learned Professor Carlyle were obtained in,
Syria, Constantinople, and the ishiuds of the Levant, it is probable, whenever they shall be
collated, that they will be found to coincide with the Byaantine Recension. These manu-
scripts are preserved in the Archiopiscopal Library at Lambeth, and are described in/ra,
pp. 150,151.
1 Michaelis, vol. ii. pp.163 177. Gricsbach's Symbols Oiticae, torn. i. pp. cxvii.
cxxii. cxxxvii. clvii clxiv. torn, ii. pp. 132 148. Griesbach's edit, of the New Test,
vol. i, Proleg. pp, IxxiiL Ixxxi, edit. Hal, 1 79$,
H 4
General Observations [Part I. Ch. III.
conformable to classic usage. The Western is characterised by read-
ings calculated to relieve the text from difficulties, and to clear the
sense : it frequently adds supplements to the passages adduced from
the Old Testament; and omits words that appear to be either re-
pugnant to the context or to other passages, or to render the mean-
ing obscure. The Alexandrine is free from the interpretations and
transpositions of the western recensions. An explanatory reading is
therefore suspicious in the western recension, and a classical one in
the Alexandrine. The Byzantine or Constantinopolitan recension
(according to Griesbach's system) preserves the Greek idiom still
purer than the Alexandrine, and resembles the Western in its use
of copious and explanatory readings. It is likewise mixed, through-
out, with the readings of the other recensions.
The system of recensions, above proposed by Bengel and Semler,
and completed by the late celebrated critic Dr. Griesboch, has been
subjected to a very severe critical ordeal ; and has been formidably
attacked., on the Continent by the late M. Matthaei, and in this coun-
try by the Rev. Dr. Laurence (now archbishop of Cashel) 1 , and the
Rev, Frederic Nolan.
2. Totally disregarding Griesbach's system of recensions, Profes-
sor MATTHAEI recognises only one class or family of manuscripts,
which he terms Codices Textus Perpetid, and pronounces every thing
that is derived from commentaries and scholia to be corrupt As
the manuscripts of the New Testaments which he found in the library
of the Synod, came originally from Mount Athos, and other parts
of the Greek empire, and as the Russian church is a daughter of the
Greek church, those manuscripts consequently contain what Gries-
bach has called the Byzantine Text ; which Matthsei admits to be the
only authentic text, excluding the Alexandrine and Western recen-
sions, and also rejecting all quotations from the fathers of the Greek
church. To the class of manuscripts to which the Codex Bezse, the
Codex Claromontanus, and others of high antiquity belong, he gave,
in the preface to his edition of Saint John's Gospel, the appellation
of Editio Sewrilis, nor did he apply softer epithets to those critics
who ventured to defend such manuscripts.' 2
3. The Rev. F. NOLAN'S system of recensions is developed in his
Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate or received Text of
the New Testament." (London, 1815, 8vo.) 3 That integrity he has
confessedly established by a series of proofs and connected arguments,
the most decisive that can be reasonably desired or expected ; but as
these occupy nearly six hundred closely printed pages, the limits of
this section necessarily restrict us to the following concise notice of
his elaborate system.
' In his ' Remarks on the Classification of Manuscripts adopted by Griesbach in his
edition of the New Testament," Oxford, 1814. 8vo.
2 Schoell, Hist, de la Literature Grecque, torn. ii. p. 13C. Bishop Marsh's Lectures,
part ii. p. 30. '
s There is a copious analysis of this work in the British Critic, (N. S/) vol. v. pp. l
24., from which, and from the work itself, the present notice of Mr. Nolan's system of
recensions is derived.
bSect. IIL 1.] :** On Greek Manuscripts. 105
I ^
I It has been an opinion as early as the times of Bishop Walton,
-that the purest text of the Scripture canon had been presetted at
Alexandria; the libraries of that city having been celebraiSj'froin
an early period for their correct and splendid copies. From'the
.identity of any MS. in its peculiar readings, with the Scripture quo-
tations of Origen, who presided in the catechetical school of Alex-
andria, a strong presumption arises that it contains the Alexandrine
recension : the supposition being natural, that Origen drew his quo-
tations from the copies generally prevalent in his native country.
This, as we have seen, was the basis of Dr. Griesbach's system of
recensions : accordingly he ascribes the highest rank to the manu-
scripts of the Alexandrine class, the authority of a few of which in
his estimation outweighs that of a multitude of the Byzantine. The
peculiar readings, which he selects from the manuscripts of this class,
he confirms by a variety of collateral testimony, principally drawn
from the quotations of the antient fathers and the versions made in
the primitive ages. To the authority of Origen, however, he ascribes
a paramount weight, taking it as the standard by which his colla-
teral testimony is to be estimated; and using their evidence merely
to support his testimony, or to supply it when it is deficient. The
readings which he supports by this weight of testimony, he considers
genuine; and, introducing a number of them into the sacred page,
he has thus formed his corrected text of the New Testament The
necessary result of this process, as obviously proving the existence
of a great number of spurious readings, has been that of shaking
the authority of the authorised English version, together with the
foundation on which it rests.
In combating the conclusions of Griesbaeh, Mr. Nolan argues,
from the inconstancy of Origen's quotations, that no certain conclu-
sion can be deduced from his testimony ; he infers from the history
of Origen, who principally wrote and published in Palestine, that the
text, quoted by that antient father, was rather the Palestine than the
Alexandrine ; and he proves, from the express testimony of Saint
Jerome, that the text of Origen was really adopted in Palestine,
while that of Hesychius was adopted at Alexandria.
Having thus opened the question, and set it upon the broader
ground assumed by those critics, who confirm the readings of the
Alexandrine text, by the coincidence of the antient versions of the
Oriental and Western churches ; Mr. N. combats this method, pro-
posed for investigating the genuine texts, in two modes. He first
shows that a coincidence between the Western and Oriental churches
does not necessarily prove the antiquity of the text which they mu-
tually support; as ihe versions of the former church were corrected,
after the texts of the latter, by Jerome and Cassiodorus, who may
have thus created the coincidence, which is taken as a proof of the
genuine reading. In the next place, he infers, from the prevalence
of a text published by Eusebius of Caesarea, and from the compara-
tively late period at which the Oriental Versions were formed, that
their general coincidence may be traced to the influence of Eusebius's
I edition, This position he establishes, by a proof deduced from the
106 General Observations [Part I. Ch. IIL
general prevalence of Eusebius's sections and canons in the Greek
MSS. and antient versions, and by a presumption derived from the
agreements of those texts and versions with each other, in omitting
several passages contained in the Vulgate Greek, which were at
variance with Eusebius's peculiar opinions. 1 And having thus esta-
blished the general influence of Eusebius's text, he generally con-
cludes against the stability of the critical principles on which the
German critics have undertaken the correction of the Greek Vulgate.
The material obstacles being thus removed to the establishment of
his plan, Mr. Nolan next proceeds to investigate the different classes
of text which exist in the Greek manuscripts. Having briefly con-
sidered the Scripture quotations of the fathers, and shown that they
afford no adequate criterion for reducing the text into classes, he
proceeds to the consideration of the antient translations, and after an
examination of the Oriental versions, more particularly of the Sahi-
dic, he conies to the conclusion, that no version but the Latin can
be taken as a safe guide in ascertaining the genuine text of Scripture.
This point being premised, the author lays the foundation of his
scheme of classification, in the following observations.
" In proceeding to estimate the testimony which the Latin trans-
lation bears to the state of the Greek text, it is necessary to premise,
that this translation exhibits three varieties: as corrected by Saint
Jerome, at the desire of Pope Damasus, and preserved in the Vul-
gate ; as corrected by Eusebius of Verceli, at the desire of Pope
Julius, and preserved in the Codex Vercellensis ; and as existing
previously to the corrections of both, and preserved, as I conceive,
in the Codex Brixianus. The first of these three editions of the
Italic translation is too well known to need any description ; both the
last are contained in beautiful manuscripts, preserved at Verceli, and
at Brescia, in Italy. The curious and expensive manner in which at
least the latter of these manuscripts is executed, as written on purple
vellum in silver characters, would of itself contain no inconclusive
proof of its great antiquity; such having been the form in which the
most esteemed works were executed in the times of Eusebius, Chry-
sostom, and Jerome. The former is ascribed, by immemorial tradi-
tion, to Eusebius Vercellensis, the friend of Pope Julius and Saint
Athanasius, and, as supposed to have been written with his own hand,
is deposited among the relics, which are preserved, with a degree of
superstitious reverence, in the author's church at Verceli in Pied-
mont. By these three editions of the translation, we might naturally
expect to acquire some insight into the varieties of the original ; and
this expectation is fully justified on experiment. The latter, not less
than the former, is capable of being distributed into three kinds;
each of which possesses an extraordinary coincidence with one of a
correspondent kind, in the translation. In a word, the Greek manu-
scripts are capable of being divided into three principal classes, one
i In the course of this discussion, Mr. Nolan assigns adequate reasons for the omission
of the following remarkable passages. Markxvi, 920., Johnviii. 1 11., and for the
peculiar readings of the following celebrated texts, Actsxx, 28, 1 Tim, Hi, 16. 1 John
T, 7. See his Inquiry, pp. 3541.
Sect. III. 1.] On Greek Manuscripts. 107
of which agrees with the Italic translation contained in the Brescia
manuscript; another with that contained in the Verceli manuscript;
and a third with that contained in the Vulgate." 1
Specimens of the nature and closeness or the coincidence of these
three classes are annexed by Mr. Nolan, in separate columns, from
which the four following examples are selected. He has prefixed the
readings of the received text and authorised English version (from
Matt. v. 38. 41. and 44.), in order to evince their coincidence with that
text, to which the preference appears to be due, on account of its con-
formity to the Italic translation contained in the Codex Brixianus.
38. KO.I o^ovra avri oSovTO^. Rec.
and a tooth for a tooth. Auth.
ofavra avn &wro$. Cant. dentein pro dentera. Verc.
y.ai cSovra avri oSoj/To?. Vat. et dentem pro dente, Vulg.
KOU oSovra avn O&OVTO?. Mosc. et dentem pro dente. Brix.
4?1 vKaye [LIT avrov Suo. Rec.
go with him twain. Auth.
/AST' avrov en aXXa Suo. vade cum illo adhuc alia duo.
Cant. Verc.
avrov Suo. Vat. vade cum illo et alia duo. Vulg.
' avrov Suo. Mosc. vade cum illo duo. Brix
44. EuXo-yeiTE vovq Y.araoopEVQVi; v[Aa,$. Rec.
bless them that curse you. Auth.
TOV<; KaJaoufAevovq vuxq* ...... desunt. Verc.
Cant. ...... desunt. Vulg.
hoyetre rovq KalaocopevDvq vpa,q. benedicite raaledicentibus vos.
Mosc. Brix.
44>.
pray for them who despitefully use you
and persecute you. Auth.
/ sTtYigexfyvTuv 'ACM .orate pro calumniantibus et perse-
/ 5/>ca(j. Cant. quentibus vos. Verc.
vKEp ray BtwxovTWj/ it^a^ orate pro persequentibus et calum-
Vat. niantibus vos. Vulg.
osafyvrav orate pro calumniantibus vobis et
Mosc. persequentibus vos. Brix.
The preceding short specimen will sufficiently evince the affinity
subsisting between the Latin and Greek manuscripts, throughout the
different classes into which they may be divided: at the same time it
will illustrate the dissimilarity which those classes exhibit among them-
selves, in either language, regarded separately. Still further to evince
the affinity which in other respects they possess among themselves, Mr.
NoJan exhibits a connected portion, comprising the first twelve verses of
the fifth chapter of St. Matthew's Gospel, in the original and the trans-
lation: from which we select the six following examples :
CLASS i.
Codex Cantalrigiensis. Codex Vercellensis.
1. I8wv $ TOU S - ox^ l '? aJ/E ft si* TO 1. Videns autem Jesus turbam,
y.a*Hicrav7oq avrov y ffpotr^X^v ascendit in montem, et cum sedis-
o |i*aSoj7a; avrov set, accesserunt ad eum discipuli
ejus ; _
1 Nolan's Inquiry, pp. 58 61.
.108
2, Kat
General Obsei-vations
[Part I. Ch. III.
TO a-Topa ai>Tw, 2. Et aperuit os suum, ct docebat
eos dicens :
3. Maxapioi ai *r7a%o* TU wevpeth' 3. Beati pauperes spiritu : quoni-
T* auT<yy so-riv j Gatriteia, TUV ovpavuv. am ipsorum est regnum coelorum.
5, Maxa^o* of -ffpws' or* avro* x^- 5. Beati mites : quoniam ipsi he-
pwofMjtrovtri rvjv yqv. * rcditate possidebunt terram.
4. Maxap; of wevfrow^' on auTot _ 4. Beati qui lugent: quoniam
-sraflaxXij&ijoWa*. *P s i consolabuntur.
6. Mav.cc/jioi of irwwles /* 8n|/i/7ec 6- Beati qui esuriunt et sitiunt
" i- justitiam : quoniam ipsi satura-
buntur.
Codex Vaticanus.
I. iS&jy Is rov<; oxfiovf, avyv}
avrw] of ]tAa5yj7ai avrov'
2. Kat avoi%a$ TO ffropa avrov,
3. MaxopioJ of izr7w%ot T
or* au7i?v eo-rtv jj paa-tKEta, ia>v
CLASS II.
Versio VuJgata.
; TO 1. Videns autem turbas ascendit
in montem, et cum sedissetacccsse-
runt ad eum discipuli ejus :
2. Et aperiens os suum, docebat
eos dicens :
3. Beati pauperes spiritu : quo-
niam ipsorum est regnum coelo-
rum.
4. Maxapiot of Erev3row7es' OTI uwrQt 4. Beati mites : quoniam ipsi
possidebunt terram.
5. Beati qui lugent: quoniam ipsi
consolabuntur.
s SjiJ/ftw- 6- Beati qui esuriunt et sitiunt
%op7acr- justitiam : quoniam ipsi saturabun-
tur.
Codex Moscuensis.
5. Maxapwt ot -arpaejg' ort au
6. Maxap*o* ot
7e S " TIJJ/ SixaiOiru^J'' on
I, I80v
TOV?
ave&q stq TO
KUTW ot /xaSr^7ai
2. Kat cti/oi
3. Maxa/uoi
t KVTUV zfftiv
4.
TUV ovpavuv*
f^' OT* auro:
CLASS III.
Codex Brixiensis,
1. Videns autcm turbas ascendit
in montem, et cum sedisset accesse-
runt ad eum discipuli ejus ;
2. Et aperiens os suum, docebat
eos dicens :
3. Beati pauperes spiritu : quoni-
am ipsorum est regnum coelorum.
4. Beati qui lugent : quoniam ipsi
consolabuntur.
5. Beati mansueti : quoniam ipsi
hereditabunt terram.
6. Peati qui esuriunt et sitiunt
justitiam : quoniam ipsi saturabun-
tur.
On these different classes of manuscripts in the Greek and Latin,
Mr. Nolan remarks, that it must be eviJent, on the most casual
inspection, that the manuscripts in both languages possess the same
. textj though manifestly of different classes. " They respectively
possess that identity in the choice of terms and arrangement of the
language, which is irreconcileable with the notion of their having
descended from different archetypes. And though these classes, in
either language, vary among themselves, yet, as "the translation fol-
6. Maxapio* of vrewuvJet; xat
Sect. III. J 1.] On Greek Manuscripts. 109
lows the varieties of the original, the Greek and Latin consequently
afford each other mutual confirmation. The different classes of
text in the Greek and Latin translation, as thus coincidingj may be
regarded as the conspiring testimony of those churches, which were
appointed the witnesses and keepers of Holy Writ, to the existence
of three species of text in the original and in the translation." l
Having thus produced the testimony of the eastern and western
churches to the existence of these classes, the learned inquirer pro-
ceeds to ascertain the antiquity of the classes : which he effects by
the Latin translation.
" As the existence of a translation necessarily implies the priority
of the original from which it was formed ; this testimony may be
directly referred to the close of the fourth century. The Vulgate
must be clearly referred to that period, as it was then formed by
St. Jerome ; in its bare existence, of course, the correspondent an-
tiquity of the Greek text, with which it agrees, is directly established.
This version is, however, obviously less antient than that of the
Verceli or Brescia manuscript ; as they are of the old Italic transla-
tion, while it properly constitutes the new. In the existence of
the antient version, the antiquity of the original text with that
which it corresponds is consequently established. The three classes
of text, which correspond with the Vulgate and Old Italic Version,
must be consequently referred to a period not less remote than the
close of the fourth century." -
The system of classification being thus carried up as high as the
fourth century, Mr. Nolan justifies it by the testimony of Jerome;
for this learned father, who lived at that period, asserts the existence
of three classes of text in the same age, which respectively prevailed
in Egypt, Palestine, and Constantinople. The identity of these
classes with the different classes of text which still exist in the Greek
original and Latin translation 3 t our author then proceeds to esta-
blish. And this he effects by means of the manuscripts which have
been written, the versions which have been published, and the col-
lations which have been made, in the different countries to which St,
Jerome refers his classes; founding every part of his proofs on the
testimony of Adler, Birch, Woiclc, Hunter, and other critics who
have analysed the text and versions of the New Testament,
The result of this investigation is, that the three classes of text,
which are discoverable in the Greek manuscripts, are nearly identical
with the three editions, which existed in the age of Jerome; with
which they are identified by their coincidence witli the Latin trans-
lation which existed in the age of that Christian father. Of \\wjlrst
class, the Codex Bezse or Cambridge manuscript, is an exemplar : it
contains the text which Jerome refers to l^ypt, and ascribes to
Hesychius. Of the second class 9 the Codex J'aticanus, or Vatican
manuscript, forms the exemplar, and contains the text which Jerome
refers to Palestine, and ascribes to Eusebius ; and of the third class,
) Nolan's Inquiry, p 70. a ibid, pp. 70, 71.
s To which is now to be added the Feschito or Old Syriar version. The identity
ahove noticed Mr. Nolan purposes fully to illustrate, in a future edition of his < Inquiry."
110 Genwal Observations [Part I. Ch, III.
the Moscow manuscript, collated by Matthsei, and by him noted with
the letter V. and the Harleian manuscript in the British Museum,
No. 5684-,, noted G. by Griesbach, are the exemplars, and contain
the text which Jerome attributes to Lucian, and refers to Constan-
tinople. The result of Mr. Nolan's long and elaborate discussion
is, that, as the Occidental or Western, Alexandrine, and Byzantine
texts (according to Griesbach's system of recensions), respectively
coincide with the Egyptian, Palestine, and Byzantine texts of Mr. N.,
\ve have only to substitute the term Egyptian for Western, and
Palestine for Alexandrine, in order to ascertain the particular text
of any manuscript which is to be referred to a peculiar class or edi-
tion. " The artifice of this substitution admits of this simple solu-
tion : the Egyptian text was imported by Eusebius of Verceli into
the West, and the Palestine text republished by Euthalius at Alex-
andria, the Byzantine text having retained the place in which it was
originally published by Lucianus. In a word, a manuscript which
harmonises with the Codex Cantabrigiensis, must be referred to the
first class, and will contain the text of Egypt. One which harmo-
nises with the Vatican manuscript, must be referred to the second
class, and will contain the text of Palestine. And one which har-
monises with the Moscow manuscript, must be referred to the third
class, and will contain the text of Constantinople. 1
The advantages resulting from the system'of recensions just de-
veloped are twofold : In the first place, itleadsHot only to a more
adequate method of classification, but also to the discovery of a more
antient text, by means of the priority of the old Italic Version to the
New or Vulgate Latin of Jerome. And, secondly, it coincides with
the respective schemes of Dr. Griesbach and of M. Matthsei, and
derives support from their different systems. It adopts the three
classes of the former, with a slight variation merely in the name of
the classes ; and, in ascertaining the genuine text, it attaches the same
authority to the old Italic translation, which the same distinguished
critic has ascribed to that version. It likewise agrees with the scheme
of Matthsei, in giving the preference to the KOJVIJ Ex8o<nj, the Greek
Vulgate or Byzantine text, over the Palestine and Egyptian ; but it
supports the authority of this text on firmer grounds than the con-
currence of the Greek manuscripts, " Hence," it is observed, that
" while it differs from the scheme of M. Matthsei, in building on the
Old Italic Version, it differs from that of Dr. Griesbach, in distin-
guishing the copies of this translation, which are free from the in-
fluence of the Vulgate, from those which have been corrected since
the times of Eusebius of Verceli, of Jerome, and Cassiodorus. And
it affords a more satisfactory mode of disposing of the multitude of
various readings, than that suggested by the latter, who refers them
to the intentional or accidental corruptions of transcribers; or by that of
the former, who ascribes them to the correction of the original Greek
ty the Latin translation : as it traces them to the influence of the text
which was published by Eusebius, at the command of Constantine."
1 Nolan's Inquiry, pp. 105, 106.
Sect. III. Jl.] On Greek Manuscripts. 1 J 1
4. Widely different from all the preceding theories is the system
of recensions proposed by the learned (Roman Catholic) Professor
HUG, of Fribourg, who affirms the existence of three recensions or
editions, and divides the history of the sacred text of the New Tes-
tament into three periods, viz.
(1.) The First Period comprises the text of the New Testament,
from the time when its several books were written to the third cen-
tury. That text, according to the testimony of Clement of Alex-
andria, Origen, Irenaeus, and other Fathers, was early the object
of imprudent or rash alterations ; although their statements were
greatly exaggerated, yet the fact is certain, that such alterations were
actually made; and the text, thus altered, was, according to Hug,
what is commonly termed KOINH EKAO2I2, or the common edition.
Though almost every where the same, this edition had two forms, a
little different, one of which corresponds with Griesbach's Western
Recension, and the other with his special Asiatic Instruments, and
particularly with the Peschito or Old Syriac version.
(2.) Second Period. The defects of the common edition having
been perceived about the middle of the third century, three learned
men, severally and independently, though nearly simultaneously, un-
dertook the arduous task of purifying the text, and of restoring it
to its first form, by the aid of manuscripts, viz. Origen in Pales-
tine, Hesychius in Egypt, where he was a bishop, and Lucian, a
priest at Antioch, in Syria. The work of Hesychius was generally
received in Egypt, and became the source of the Alexandrine
family : that of Lucian^ which was better known, and has sometimes
been termed the Editio VuLgata, or Lucia?ius y was introduced into
divine worship in Syria, in Asia Minor, in Thrace, and at Constan-
tinople ; and that of Origen, having been made in his old age, and
left for publication by his pupils, was confined within Palestine,
where it was soon superseded by the edition of Lucian, and in no
long time was entirely lost.
(3.) The Third Period of the history of the text of the New Tes-
tament embraces the variations made therein, from the threefold
recension in the third century, to our own time. l
5. The system proposed by Professor Hug has been much and
deservedly admired for its ingenuity, and for the solution which it
affords to a great number of difficulties. It has, however, been ma-
terially modified by Dr. (now Professor) SCHOLZ, a pupil of Hug's,
of whose views he is by no means a servile follower,
Scholz has, in fact, proposed two systems of recensions.
(1.) Thejirst of these systems was communicated to the public
in 1820' 2 , and was the result of his examination of forty-eight manu-
scripts in the Royal Library at Paris; seventeen of which he col<r
lated entirely and with the utmost care, and nine of them had never/
before been examined by any person. In the opinion of Scholz, there
1 Celleritir, Introduction au Nouv* Test. pp. 84 103. Hug's Introd. to the New
Testament, vol. i. pp.134 331.
- Curse Criticoi in Historiom Textus Evangeliorum, Connnentationibus Duis exhibitsg
a Job. M, Augustino Scholz. Heidelbergse, 1820. 4to,
General Observations [Part I. Ch. III.
is nothing which indicates the existence of the Origenian Recension;
and the labours of Hesychius and of Lucian had no more influence
on the history of the text than those of their predecessors. He
professes carefully to have examined every thing concerning them in
the antient writers of the church ; and he states that he has found
nothing that could lead him to form a different idea. But, among
the various instruments or manuscripts which he has compared,
he thinks he has discovered vestiges of four distinct families ; viz.
two African or rather Egyptian^ one of which corresponds with the
Alexandrine Recension of Griesbach, and the other, with his Occi-
dental Recension; and two Asiatic, one of which is particularly
deserving of that name, and corresponds with the special Asiatic
instruments of Griesbach, and the other under the appellation of
Byzantine^ is the Constantinopolitan Recension. To these he added
a fifth recension, which he denominated the Cyprian^ because it con-
tains that text which is exhibited in the Codex Cypriu^ a manuscript
of the eighth century brought from the isle of Cyprus (whence it
derives its name), which is described in a subsequent page. By a
comparison of the readings of the Codex Cypvius with the received
text, and with the Alexandrine and Constantinopolitan Recensions
in nearly one hundred instances. Professor Scholz has shown, that
it very frequently coincides with the two last, sometimes agreeing with
both, sometimes following the one or the other of them, and some-
times holding a mean between them. In many instances it harmo-
nises with but few manuscripts ; and in some cases its readings are
peculiar to itself. On these accounts, he is of opinion that the Codex
Cyprius exhibits a>family which has sprung from a collation of vari-
ous manuscripts, some of which owe their origin to Egypt, others to
Asia, and others to Cyprus.
The origin and history of the four African and Asiatic families
above mentioned, are investigated at considerable length by Profes-
sor Seholz, who proceeds to form an estimate of their respective
critical merits. In the two African families he finds an extremely
corrupted text; but the two Asiatic families are very superior to
them, approaching much nearer to the original purity of the antient
text : and (which is a necessary consequence) they differ very little
from each other ; they present a text much more fixed, more uni-
form, and more generally approved.
It is proper to add that, subsequently to Scholz's publication of
the preceding theory of recensions, Professor Hug, with a candour
and modesty which reflect the highest honour upon him, announced
that his pupil's labours had led him to entertain some doubts con-
cerning his own system ; and that he shall wait for the appearance
of the critical edition of the New Testament which Seholz is prepar-
ing, before he offers any reply to his theory.
(2.) The theory of Prof. Seholz has been materially modified in
consequence of the results obtained by him in his Biblical Re-
searches in various parts of Europe and in Palestine ; and in which '
he goes far towards overturning the bases of the systems of recen-
sions generally adopted in Germany. Of these details he has pub-
Sect. III. I .] On Greek Manuscripts. US
lished an interesting account (in German 1 ), which does not admit of
abridgment. It may, however, suffice here to state that from the
differences which are sufficiently perceptible in the manuscripts and
editions of the Greek Text of the New Testament, he concludes that
these instruments naturally -divide themselves into TWO great classes,
which are constantly the same throughout the books of the New Tes-
tament. To the first of these classes belong all the editions and
those numerous manuscripts, which were written within the limits of
the patriarchate of Constantinople) or which were destined for litur-
gical use: the second class comprises certain manuscripts written in
the south of France, in Sicily, Egypt, and elsewhere. Transcribed,
unquestionably, from copies which were valuable on account of
their age and beauty, they were intended only to preserve the con-
tents of those copies: but, as they presented a different text from,
that which was generally received, they could not be employed in
divine service: hence they were foe. the most part negligently written,
with an incorrect orthography, and on leaves of vellum of different sizes
and qualities. To this class, Prof. Scholz gives the appellation of
Alexandrine., because its text originated in Alexandria. The other
class he terms the Constantinopolitan^ because its text was written
within the precincts of the patriarchate of Constantinople : and he
has endeavoured to show, by the actual collation of several hundred
manuscripts (which is further confirmed by an induction of historical
particulars), that the Constantinopolitan text is almost always faithful
to the text now actually received, while the Alexandrine text varies
from it. in almost every verse. There are extant other manuscripts,
which, belong sometimes to one class, and sometimes to the other,
and which also have some peculiar varieties : but repeated examin-
ations of them enable him to state that they do not possess sufficient
characters to constitute them distinct classes. '
In the subsequent part of his Biblico- Critical Travels, Professor
Scholz proceeds to discuss the use of the terms, recensio and textus
recetisus, introduced by Griesbach, and formerly adopted by himself;
which terms he is of opinion are now no longer applicable. According
to Scholz, the Constantinopolitan text never underwent any general
revision; and the Alexandrine text, which was corrupted in the
three first centuries, has since that time remained .without any fur-
ther alteration.
Although Prof. Scholz' s system of classing manuscripts seems,
at first view, to contradict those of his predecessors in this depart-
ment of sacred criticism, yet this contradiction is only apparent not
real : for he actually recognises the same facts as other critics, he only
denies the importance of some, and explains others in a different way*
With respect to the results, however, there is no difference. The
grand, the final result of the principle of families, viz. the possibility
1 Biblische Critische Reise, &c. L e. Biblico- Critical Travels in France, Switzerland,
Italy, Palestine, and the Archipelago, in 1818-1821. pp, I61J 182. Leipzig, J823. Kvo.
There is an interesting account of these Travels in the Bibliotheque Universelle (Literature)
for 1823, torn, atxiv. pp, 335 355*
VOL,. II. I,
Observations on Greek Manuscripts* [Part I. Ch. III.
and certainty of the integrity of the sacred text is exposed more
distinctly by Scholz than by any of his predecessors. Further,
though not free from objections, this system appears generally to offer
more than any other, a remarkable character of simplicity and uni-
versality : it is less complicated, and also possesses a greater degree
of probability, than those of Griesbach and Hug, and it is supported
by researches which are truly learned and laborious. Although the
absolute certainty of Scholz's system can only be determined by the
appearance of the critical edition of the Greek New Testament, which
he is preparing for publication ; yet he is allowed to have done much
towards demonstrating the great pre-eminence of the Asiatic or Con-
stantinopolitan text" over the African or Alexandrine text, and conse-
quently the real merit of the present received text of the New Tes-
tament. But, whatever may be the result of Scholz's projected
edition, (and towards which six hundred, manuscripts^ unknown to
Griesbach, have lent their aid,) the critical labours of Dr. "Griesbach
will not cease to possess high claims to the grateful attention of every
student of sacred literature.
As a general and correct index to the great body of Greek manu-
scripts, they are an invaluable treasure to the scholar, and a necessary
acquisition to the divine: at the same time, his collection of various
readings is admirably calculated to satisfy our minds on a point of the
highest moment, the integrity of the Christian Records. Through
the long interval of seventeen hundred years, amidst the collision
of parties, the opposition of enemies, and the desolations of time,
* they remain the same as holy men read them in the primitive ages of
Christianity* A very minute examination of manuscripts, versions,
and fathers, proves the inviolability of the Christian Scriptures.
" They all coincide in exhibiting the same Gospels, Acts, and Epistles;
and among all tiie copies of them which have been preserved, there
is not one which dissents from the rest either in the doctrines or pre-
cepts', which constitute Christianity. They ALL contain the same
doctrines and precepts. For the knowledge of this fact, we are in-
debted to such men as Griesbach, whose zealous and persevering
labours to put us in possession of it intitle them to our grateful
remembrance. To the superficial, and to the novice, in theology,
the long periods of life, and the patient investigation, which have been
applied to critical investigation, may appear as mere waste, or, at the
best, as only amusing employment,: but to the serious inquirer, who,
from his own conviction, can declare that he is not following cun-
ningly devised fables, the time, the talents, and the learning, which
have been devoted to critical collation, will be accounted as well ex-
pended, for the result which they have accomplished. The real theo-
logian is satisfied from his own examination, that the accumulation of
many thousands of various read ings, obtained at the expense of immense
critical labour, does not affect a single sentiment in the whole New
Testament. And thus is criticism, which some despise, and others
neglect, found to be one of those undecaying columns, by which
the imperishable structure of Christian Truth is supported." 1
J Eclectic Be vie \v 9 vol, v. parti, p, 189.
Sect. III. 2.JJ Account of Greek Manuscripts. 115
VI. From the coincidence observed between many Greek manu-
scripts and the Vulgate, or some other Latin version, a suspicion arose
in the minds of several eminent critics, that the Greek text had been
altered throughout to the Latin ; and it has been asserted that at the
council of Florence, (held in 1439 with the view of establishing an
union between the Greek and Latin churches,) a resolution was
formed, that the Greeks should alter their manuscripts from the Latin.
This has been termed by the learned, Fczdus cum Gr&cis. The sus-
picion, concerning the altering of the Greek text, seems to have been
first suggested by Erasmus, but it does not appear that he supposed
the alterations were made before the fifteenth century : so that the
charge of Latinising the manuscripts did not (at least in his notion of it)
extend to the original writers of the manuscript, or as they are called,
the writers a primd mami; since it affected only the writers a secunda
manu, or subsequent interpolators. The accusation was adopted and
extended by Father Simon and Dr, Mill, and especially by Wetstein.
Bengel expressed some doubts concerning it ; and it was formally
questioned by Seinler, Griesbach, and Woide. The reasonings of
the two last-mentioned critics convinced Michaelis (who had formerly
agreed with Erasmus) that the charge of Latinising was unfounded;
and in the fourth edition of his Introduction to the New Testament
(the edition translated by Bishop Marsh), with a candour of which
there are too few examples, Michaelis totally abandoned his first
opinion, and expressed his opinion that the pretended agreement in
the Fcedus cum Gr&cis is a mere conjecture of Erasmus, to which he
had recourse as a refuge in a matter of controversy. Carrying the
proof to its utmost length, it only shows that the Latin translations
and the Greek copies were made from the same exemplars ; which
rather proves the antiquity of the Latin translations, than the cor-
ruption of the Greek copies. It is further worthy of remark, that
Jerome corrected the Latin from the Greek, a circumstance which is
known in every part of the Western Church. Now, as Michaelis justly
observes, when it was known that the learned father had made the
Greek text the basis of his alterations in the Latin translation, it is
scarcely to be imagined that the transcribers of the Western Church
would alter the Greek by the Latin ; and it is still less probable, that
those of the Eastern Church would act in this manner. 1
%. ACCOUNT OF GREEK MANUSCRIPTS, CONTAINING THJE OLD AND
NEW TESTAMENTS,
I. The Alexandrian Manuscript. II. The Vatican
the few manuscripts known to be extant, which contain the
Greek Scriptures,(that is, the Old Testament, according to the Scp-
tuagint Version, and the New Testament,) there are two which pre-
eminently demand the attention of the biblical student for their
1 Michaelis's Introduction, vol. ii. parti, pp. 163 173. Butler's Ilorae Biblica;,
vol. i. p, 1 8.
1 2
1 16 Account of Greek Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. III.
antiquity and intrinsic value, viz. The Alexandrian manuscript, which
is preserved in the British Museum, and the Vatican .manuscript,
deposited in the library of the Vatican Palace at Rome.
I. The CODEX ALEXANDRINUS, or Alexandrian Manuscript, which
is noted by the letter A. in Wetstein's and Griesbach's critical edi-
tions .of the New Testament, consists of four folio volumes ; the three
first -cantain the whole of the Old Testament, together with the apo-
cryphal boots, and the fourth comprises the New Testament, the
first epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, and the apocryphal Psalms
ascribed to Solomon. In the New Testament there is wanting the
beginning as far as Matt. xxv. 6. o vup,<pio sp^srai ; likewise from
John vi. 50. to viii. 52. and from 2 Cor. iv. 1 3. to xii. 7- The Psalms
are preceded by the epistle of Athanasius to Marcellinus, and fol-
lowed by a catalogue, containing those which are to be used in prayer
for each hour, both of the day and of the night ; also 'by fourteen
hymns, partly apocryphal, partly -biblical, the eleventh of which
is the hymn of .the Virgin Mary, usually termed the Magnificat,
(Luke i. 46 55.) and here intitled irpo<rev%y Mapid$ ry$ QeoroKO'j,
or, the prayer of Mary the mother of God; the arguments of Eu-
sebius are annexed to the Psalms, and his canons to the Gospels.
This manuscript is now preserved in the British Museum, where
it was deposited in 1753. It was sent as a present to King
Charles I. from Cyrillus Lucaris, a native of Crete, and patriarch of
Constantinople, by Sir Thomas Howe, ambassador from England to
the Grand Seignior, in the year 1628. Cyriilus^brought it with him
from Alexandria, where, probably, it was written. In a schedule
annexed to it, he gives this account; that it was written, according to
tradition, by Thecla, a noble Egyptian lady, about thirteen hundred
years ago, a little after the council of Nice. He adds, that the name of
Thecla, at the, end of the book, was erased ; but that this was the case
with other books of the Christians, after Christianity was extinguished
in Egypt by the Mohammedans : and that recent tradition records
the fact of the laceration .and erasure of Thecla's name. The pro-
prietor of thij .manuscript, before it came into the hands of Cyrillus
Lucaris, liad written an Arabic subscription, expressing that this book
was said to have been written with the pen of Thecla the Martyr.
Various disputes have arisen with regard to the place whence it
was brought, and where it was written, to its antiquity, and of course
to its real value. Some critics have bestowed upon it the highest
commendation, whilst it has been equally depreciated by others; Of
its most strenuous adversaries, Wetstein seems to have been the
principal. The place from which it was sent to England was, without
doubt, Alexandria, and tence it has been called Codex Alexandrinus.
As to the place where it was written, there is a considerable differ-
ence of opinion. Matthus Muttis, who was a contemporary, friend,
and deacon of Cynllus, and who afterwards instructed in the Greek
language John Rudolph Wetstein, uncle of the celebrated editor of
^e Greek Testament, bears testimony, in a letter written to Martin
JBogW. a physician in Berne, dated January 14 1664, that it had
been brought from one of the twenty-two monasteries in Mount
Athos, which the Turks never destroyed, but allowed to continue
Sect. III. 2.] Containing the Old and Nm Testaments. 117
upon the payment of tribute. Dr. Woide endeavours to weaken the
evidence ofMuttis, and to render the testimony of the elder Wetstein
suspicious: but Spohn 1 shows that the objections of Woide are un-
grounded. Allowing their reality, we cannot infer that Cyrillus found
this manuscript in Alexandria. Before he went to Alexandria he
spent some time on Mount Athos, the repository and manufactory of
manuscripts of the New Testament, whence a great number have been
brought into the West of Europe 3 and a still greater number, has
been sent to Moscow. It is therefore probable, independently of the
evidence of Muttis, that Cyrillus procured it there either by purchase
or by present, took it with him to Alexandria, and brought it thence
on his return to Constantinople. But the question recurs, where was
this copy written? The Arabic subscription above cited, clearly
proves, that it had been in Egypt at some period or other, before it
fell into the hands of Cyrillus. This subscription shows that it once
belonged to an Egyptian, or that during some time it was preserved
in Egypt, where Arabic has been spoken since the seventh century.
Besides, it is well known that a great number of manuscripts of the
Greek Bible have been written in Egypt. Woide has also pointed
out a remarkable coincidence between the Codex Alexandrinus and
the writings of the Copts. Michaelis alleges another circumstance
as a probable argument of its having been written in Egypt. In
Ezekiel xxvii. 18. both in the Hebrew and Greek text, the Tyrians.
are said to have fetched their wine from Chelbon, or, according to-
Bochart> Chalybon. But as Chalybon, though celebrated for its wine,,
was unknown to the writer of this manuscript, he has altered it by a
fanciful conjecture to OM/OV ex p^e/Hpcov, wine from Hebron. This alter-
ation was probably made by an Egyptian copyist, because Egypt was
formerly supplied with wine from Hebron. The subscription before
mentioned ascribes the writing of it to Thecla, an Egyptian lady of
high rank, who could not have been, as Michaelis supposes, the mar-
tyress Thecla, placed in the time of St. Paul : but Woide replies,
that a distinction must be made between Thecla martyr, and Thecla
proto-martyr. With regard to these subscriptions we may observe,
with Bishop Marsh, that the true state of the case appears to be as
follows : " Some centuries after the Codex Alexandrinus had been
written, and the Greek subscriptions, and perhaps those other parts
where it is more defective, already lost, it fell into the hands of a,
Christian inhabitant of Egypt, who, not finding the usual Greek sub-
scription of the copyist, added in Arabic, his native language, the
tradition, either true or false, which had been preserved in the family
or families to which the manuscript had belonged, * Memorant hunc
codicem scriptum esse calamo Theclae martyris.' In the 1 7th century,
when oral tradition respecting this manuscript had probably ceased,
it became the property of Cyrillus Lucaris : but whether in Alex-
andria, or Mount Athos, is of no importance to the present inquiry,
On examining the manuscript, he finds that the Greek subscription
1 Carol! Godofredi Woidii Notitia Codicis AlexandrinI, curn variis ejus lectionibua
omnibus. Recudendum curavit, uotasque sdjeclt Gottlieb Leberecht Spoho, pp. 1013,
(8vo. Lipsi, 1790.)
I 3
118 " Account of Greek Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. III.
is lost, but that there is a tradition recorded in Arabic by a former
proprietor, which simply related that it was written by one Thecla a
martyress, which is what he means by c memoria et traclitio recens.*
Taking therefore upon trust, that one Thecla a martyress was really
the copyist, he consults the annals of the church to discover in what
age and country a person of this name and character existed ; finds
that an Egyptian lady of rank, called Thecla, suffered martyrdom
between the time of holding the council of Nicaeaand the close of the
fourth century; and concludes, without further ceremony, that she
was the very identical copyist. Not satisfied with this discovery, he
attempts to account for the loss of the'Greek subscription, and ascribes
it to the malice of the Saracens ; being weak enough to believe that
the enemies of Christianity would exert their vengeance on the name
of a poor transcriber, and leave the four folio volumes themselves
unhurt" Dr. Woide, who transcribed and published this manu-
script, and must be better acquainted with it than any other person,
asserts, that it was written by two different copyists ; for he observed
a difference in the ink, and, which is of greater moment, even in
the strokes of the letters. The conjecture of Oudin, adopted by
Wetstein, that the manuscript was written by an Accemet is, in the
judgment of Michaelis, worthy of attention ^ and he add^ that this
conjecture does not contradict the account that Thecla was the
copyist, since there were not only monks but nuns of this order.
The antiquity of this manuscript has also been the subject of con-
troversy. Grabe and Schulze think that it might have been written
: before the end of the fourth century, which, says Michaelis, is the
very utmost period that can be allowed, because it contains the
epistles of Athanasius. Oudin places it in the tenth century. Wetstein
refers it to the fifth, and supposes that it was one of the manuscripts
collected at Alexandria in 615, for the Syriac version. Dr. Semler
refers it to the seventh century. Montfiiucon* is of opinion, that
neither the Codex Alexandrinus, nor any Greek manuscript, can be
said with great probability to be much prior to the sixth century,
Michaelis apprehends, that this manuscript was written after Arabic
was become the native language of the Egyptians, that is, one, or
rather two centuries after Alexandria was taken by the Saracens,
which happened in the year 640, because the transcriber frequently
confounds M and B, which is often done in the Arabic : and he
concludes, ^ that it is not more antient than the eighth century.
Woide, after a great display of learning, with which he examines
the evidence for the antiquity of the Codex Alexandrians, concludes,
that it was written between the middle and the end of the fourth
i The Acoemets were a class of monks in the antient church, who flourished, particu-
larly in the East, during the fifth century. They were so called, because they had divine
service performed, without interruption, in their churches. They divided themselves
into three bodies, eacli of which officiated in turn, and relieved the others, so that their
churches were never silent, either night or day. Wetstein adopts the opinion of Caahnir
Oudin, that the Codex Alexandrinus was written by an Acixmjet, because it contains a
catalogue of the psalms that were to be sung at every hour both of the day and night.
Proleg. in Nov. Test. vol. i. p. 10,
9 Palscog, Grcec. p, 185.
Sect. III. f 2.] Containing the Old and New Testaments* 119
century. It cannot be allowed a greater antiquity, because it has
not only the TtTAoj or ?CE<$#A#J# majora, but the KstyoLKcua, minora, or
Ammonian sections, accompanied with the references to the canons
of Eusebius. Woide's arguments have been objected to by Spohn. 1
Some of the principal arguments advanced by those who refer this
manuscript to the fourth or fifth centuries are the following : the
epistles of Saint Paul are not divided into chapters like the gospels,
though this division took place so early as 396, when to each chapter
was prefixed a superscription. ^The Codex Alexandrinus has the
epistles of Clement of Rome ; but these were forbidden to be read
in the churches, by the council of Laodicea, in 364, and that of
Carthage, in 419. Hence Schulze has inferred, that it was written
before the year 364; and he produces a new argument for its anti-
quity, deduced from the last of the fourteen hymns found in it after
the psalms, which is superscribed vpvo$ e0*vo$, and is called the grand
doxology ; for this hymn has not the clause ayiog o Qso$, otyto$ i<rxvpo$ 9
ayios a0varo, eXeya-ov vj^aj, which was used between the years 434
and 446 ; and therefore the manuscript must have been written be-
fore this time. Wetstein thinks that it must have been written before
the time of Jerome, because the Greek text of this manuscript was
altered from the old Italic. He adds, that the transcriber was igno-
rant that the Arabs were called Hagarenes, because he has written
(1 Chron. v. 20.) ayopxioi for Ayapaioi. Others allege that ayop*o*
is a mere erratum : because Ayap#*wv occurs in the preceding verse,
Aypir>] in 1 Chron, xxvii. 31. and Aypjvoi in Psal. Ixxxii. 7. These
arguments, says Michaelis, afford no certainty, because the Codex
Alexandrinus must have been copied from a still more antient ma-
nuscript ; and if this were faithfully copied, the arguments apply
rather to this than to the Alexandrian manuscript itself. It is the
hand-writing alone, or the formation of the letters, with the want of
accents, which can lead to any probable decision. The arguments
alleged to prove that it is not so antient as the fourth century, are
the following. Dr. Semler thinks, that the epistle of Athanasius,
on the value and excellency of the Psalms, would hardly have been
prefixed to them during his life. But it ought to be recollected,
that Athanasius had many warm and strenuous advocates. From
this epistle Oudin has attempted to deduce an argument, that the
manuscript was written in the tenth century. This epistle, lie says,
is spurious, and could not have been forged (luring the life of Atha-
nasius, and the tenth century was fertile in spurious productions.
Again, the Virgin Mary, in the superscription of the Song of the
Blessed Virgin, is styled fleoloxo?, a name which Wetstein says be-
trays the fifth century. Further, from the probable conjecture,
that this manuscript was written by one of the order of the Acoe-
metffi, Oudin concludes against its antiquity ; but Wetstein contents
himself with asserting, that it could not have been written before
the fifth century, because Alexander, who founded this order, lived -
about the year 420. From this statement, pursued more at large,
i Pp, 42109. of his edition of Woide's Notitia Codicis Alexandria!,
l 4
120 Account of Greek Manuscripts [Part I, Ch. III.
Michaelis deduces a reason for paying less regard to the Codex
Alexandrians than many eminent critics have done, and for the pre-
ference that is due, in many respects, to antient versions, before
any single manuscript, because the antiquity of the former, which is
in general greater than that of the latter, can be determined with
more precision.
The value of this manuscript has been differently appreciated by
different writers. Wetstein, though he denotes it by A, the first
letter of the .alphabet, is no great admirer of it, nor docs Michaelis
estimate it highly, either on account of its internal excellence or the
value of its readings. The .principal charge which has been pro-
duced against the Alexandrian manuscript, and which has been
strongly urged by Wetstein, is its having been altered from the
Latin version. It is incredible, says Michaelis, who once agreed
in opinion with Wetstein, but found occasion to alter his sentiments,
that a transcriber who lived in Egypt, should have altered the
Greek text from a -Latin version, because Egypt belonged to the
Greek diocese, and Latin was not understood there. On this sub-
ject Woide has eminently displayed his critical abilities, and ably
defended the Greek manuscripts in general, and the Codex Alex-
andrinus in particular, from the charge of having been corrupted
from the Latin. Griesbach concurs with Woide l , and both .have
contributed to confirm Michaelis in his new opinion. If this ma-
nuscript has been corrupted from a version, it is more reasonable
to suspect the Coptic, the version of the country in which it was
written. Between this manuscript and both the Coptic ancl Syriac
versions, there is a remarkable coincidence. Griesbach has ob-
served, that this manuscript follows three different editions : the
Byzantine in the Gospels, the Western edition in the Acts of the
Apostles, and the Catholic epistles, which form the middle division
of this manuscript, and the Alexandrine in the epistles of Saint
Paul. The transcriber, if this assertion be true, must have copied
the three parts of the Greek Testament from three different manu-
scripts of three different editions. It is observable, that the read-
ings of the Codex Alexandrinus coincide very frequently not only
with the Coptic and the old Syriac, but with the new .Syriac and
the Ethiopia; and this circumstance favours the hypothesis, that
this manuscript was written in Egypt, because the new Syriac
version having been collated with Egyptian manuscripts of the
Greek Testament, and the Ethiopic version being taken imme-
diately from them, have necessarily the readings of the Alexandrine
.edition.
The Alexandrian manuscript is written in uncial ,or capital letters,
without any accents or marks of aspiration, but with a few abbre-
viations nearly similar to those already noticed 2 , and also with some
others which are described by Dr, Woide 3 , who has likewise ex-
plained the various points and spaces occurring in this manuscript
s I 1 " JT P S J mb ?V r J tiC *''' U. pp. 110-117. tt See pp, >8, 99. supra.
is4 6 . frc-simile of the Alexandrian manuscript of the New Testament,
Sect. III. 2.] Containing the Old and New Testaments, 121
A fac-simile of the Codex Alexandrinus, containing the New
Testament, \vas published in folio by the late Dr. Woide., assistant
librarian of the British Museum, with types cast for the purpose,
line for line, without intervals between the words, precisely as in the
original. 1 The following specimen will convey to the reader an idea
of this most precious manuscript.
John i. 1 7-
? e.
7
'
MXPXH H MOXOrOCK-XIOXOroCM
OVTOCHMeMXPXHTTTOCTOMeM
KXIXOJ
KXIM2XJDH M MTOC
KXITOCbcJDCeMTi ICKOTIXCpXI
i KxiHCKOTixxvnrooYKXTe
~
C TCOYCDXMMHC OYTOCMXOeM
/ eiCMXPTYPIXM 'iMXMXPTYpH
CHTTePITOYCJ^CDTOC IMXTrXM
TeCTTlCTeYCCUCIKI^IXYTOY
For this stereotype specimen we are indebted to the Rev. tL
Baber, one of the librarians of the British Museum, who kindly
favoured us with the use of the Alexandrian types, with which he
printed the Codex Alexandrinus/ 2 For the gratification of the
English reader, the following extract is subjoined, comprising the
first seven verses of Saint John's Gospel, rendered rather more liter-
ally than the idiom of our language will admit, in order to convey
an exact idea of the original Greek (above given) of the Alexandrian
manuscript,
i See a notice of Dr. Woide's publication, in the Appendix to this volume,, p. 1
See an account of this magnificent publication in the Appendix to this volume, pp.38,
39, The reader, who may be desirous of further information concerning the Alexandrian
manuscript, is referred to Dr. Grabe's prolegomena to his edition of the Greek Septua-
gint, and also to the prolegomena of Dr. Woide already cited, and to those of Dr. Mill
and "Wetatein, prefixed to their editions of the New Testament. See also Michaelis*s
Introduction to the Nexv Testament, vol. ii, parti, pp. 186 209, and Bishop Marsh's
notes in partii. pp,648 660., and Hug's Introduction to the New Test. vol. i. pp.268
273. Dr* Lardner has given the table of contents of this manuscript in his Credibility
of the Gospel History, partii. chap. H7 (Works, 8vo. vol. y. pp. 253 256. ; 4to.
vol.iv, pp. 44 4&)
1 22 Account of Greek Manuscripts [Part I. Ch , III.
John i. 1 7.
INTHEBEGINNINGWASTHEWORDANDTHEWORDWAS
WITHGD'ANDGDWASTHEWORD_
HEWASINTHEBEGINNINGWITHGD
ALLWEREMADEBYHIMANDWITH
OUTHIMWASMADENOTONETH/ATG-
THATWASMADEINHIMLIFEWAS'
ANDTHELIFEWASTHELIGHTOFMN
ANDTHELIGHTINDARKNESSSHIN
ETHANDTHEDARKNESSDIDNOTITCOMPRE
HEND' THEREWASAMNSE
NTFROMGODWHOSENAME WAS
ASAWITNESSTHATHEMIGHTTESTI
FYCONCERNINGTHELIGHTTHATA
LLMIGHTBELIEVETHROUGHHIM-
II, The CODEX VATICANUS, No. 1209., which Wetstein and
Griesbach have both noted with the letter B, contests the palm of
antiquity with the Alexandrian manuscript. No fac-simile of it
has ever been published. The Roman edition of the Septua<int,
printed in 1590, professes to exhibit the text of this manuscript;
i and in the preface to that edition it is stated to have been written
' before the year 387, L e. towards the close of the fourth century :
Montfaucon and Blanchini refer it to the fifth or sixth century*
and Dupin to the seventh century. Professor Hug has endea-
voured to show that it was written in the early part of the fourth
century; but, from the omission of the Eusebian Ke<aAj and
nrAoi, Bishop Marsh concludes with great probability that it was
written before the close of the fifth century. The Vatican manu-
script is written on parchment or vellum, in uncial or capital letters,
in three columns on each page, all of which are of the same size'
except at the beginning of a book, and without any divisions of
chapters, verses, or words, but with accents and spirits. The shape
of the letters, and colour of the iuk, prove that it was written
throughout by one and the same careful copyist. The abbrevi-
ations are few, being confined chieflyjo those words which are in
general abbreviated, such as C, KG, 1C, XC, for 0to;, Kwioc
Vouf, Xpw, God, Lord, Jesus, Christ. Originally this manuscript
contained the entire Greek Bible, including both the Old and New
Testaments ; in which respect it resembles none so much as the
Lodex Alexandrmus, though no two manuscripts vary more in
their readings. The Old Testament wants the first forty-six chan-
ters of Genesis, and thirty-two psalms, viz. from Psal.cv. to cxxxvii
inclusive ; and the New Testament wants the latter part of the epistle
to the Hebrews, viz. all after chapter ix. verse 14k and also Saint
Pan la other epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, and the
whole Book ot Revelation. It appears, however, that this last
book, as well as the latter part of the epistle to the Hebrews, 1m
Sect. III. 2.] Containing the Old and Neto Testaments. 123
been supplied by a modern hand in the fifteenth century, and, it is
said, from some manuscript that had formerly belonged to Cardi-
nal Bessarion. In many places the faded letters have also been
retouched by a modern but careful hand : and when the person
who made these amendments (whom Michaelis pronounces to have
been a man of learning) found various readings in other manuscripts
he has introduced them into the Codex Vaticanus, but has still
preserved the original text ; and in some few instances he has ven-
tured to erase with a penknife. Various defects, both in ortho-
graphy and language, indicate that this manuscript was executed
by an Egyptian copyist. Instead of cnAPo^, &c. Tie has written
<ruAX>jp{/>j, A^^/ecr^e, Ajjjw^SiijcreTai, which occurs only in Coptic or
Grseco-coptic MSS. He has also written elTrav for elTrov, as may be
seen in the celebrated Rosetta inscription ; sTSav, lW#v, e/cnjASotv,
aveiXciTo, and SispapTvpuTOy as in the inscription of the Theban Mem-
non ; and Iwpaxav and ysyovav, as the Alexandrians wrote according
to the testimony of Sextus Empiricus. These peculiarities show
that the Codex Vaticanus exhibits the Egyptian text, subsequent to
the third century, according to the Alexandrine Recension of Gries-
bach, and the Flesychian Recension of Hug.
It has been supposed that this manuscript was collated by the
editors of the Complutensian Polyglott, and even that 'this edition
was almost entirely taken from it : but Bishop Marsh has shown by
actual comparison that this was not the case.
The Vatican manuscript has been repeatedly collated by various
eminent critics, from whose extracts Wetstein collected numerous
various readings : but the latest and best collation is that by Professor
Birch, of Copenhagen, in 1 78 1 . Although the antiquity of the Vatican
manuscript is indisputable 9 it is by no means, easy to determine be-
tween its comparative value and that of the Alexandrian manuscript;
nor is there any absolute and universal standard by which their
several excellencies may be estimated. With regard to the Old
Testament, if any Greek manuscript were now extant, containing an
exact copy of the several books as they were originally translated,
such manuscript would be perfect, and, consequently, the most valu-
able. The nearer any copy comes to this perfection, the more valu-
able it must be, and vice versa. In its present state the Hebrew
Text cannot determine fully the value of these MSS. in their rela-
tion to one another; and yet as that text receives great assistance
from both, it proves that both deserve our highest regard. It is
worthy of remark, that neither of them has the asterisks of Origen,
though both of them were transcribed in the fifth century; which,
Dr. Kennicott observes ] , is one proof that they were not taken
either mediately or immediately from the Hexapla. The Vatican
and Alexandrian manuscripts differ from each other in the Old Tes-
tament chiefly in this ; that, as they contain books, which have been
corrected by different persons, upon different principles ; and as they
differ greatly in some places in their interpolations, so they contain
many words which were either derived from different Greek ver-
124* Account of Greek Manuscripts, [Part I, Ch. IIL
sions, or else were translated by one or both of the transcribers
themselves from the Hebrew text, which was consulted by them at
the time of transcribing.
On the ground of its internal excellence, Michaelis preferred the
Vatican manuscript (for the New Testament) to the Codex Alcxan-
drinus. If, however, that manuscript be most respectable which
comes the nearest to Origen's Hexaplar copy of the Septuagint, the
Alexandrian manuscript seems to claim that merit in preference to
its rival : but if it be thought a matter of superior honour to approach
nearer the old Greek version, uncorrected by Origen, that merit seems
to be due to the Vatican. 1
The accompanying plate exhibits a specimen 'of the Vatican ma-
nuscript from a fac-simile traced in the year 1701* for l)r, Grabc,
editor of the celebrated edition of the SepLungint, which is noticed in
a subsequent part of this work. The author has reason to believe
that it is the most faithful funs-simile ever executed of this MS, It
was made by signer Zacagni, at that time principal keeper of the
Vatican library, and is now preserved among 'Dr. GAibu's manu-
scripts in the Bodleian library at Oxford. This tac-similc has been
most carefully and accurately copied, under the direction of the I lev*
Dr. Bandinel, the keeper of that noble repository of literature, to
whom the author now offers his acknowledgments for his kind assist-
ance on this occasion. The passage represented in our engraving
contains the first three verses of the first chapter of the prophet
Ezekiel, of which the following is a literal English version :
IEZEKIEL.
+ + +
NNOWITCAMETOPASSINTHETHIK
INTHE
TIETHYEARFOURTH
MONTHONTHEFIFTHOFTHEMONTH
WHENIWASINTHEMIDST
OFTHECAPTIVESBYTE
RIVERCHOBARAND
THEHEAVENSWEREOPENED
ANDISAWTHEVISIQNSOFGDONTHEF*
FTHOFTHEMONTHTHIs
WASTHEF1FTHYEAROFTHE
CAPTIVITYOFTHEICI
NGJOACHIM ANDCA_
METHEWORDOFTHELDTOE
ZEKIELTHESONOFBUZITHE
PR1ESTINTHELANDOFTHECHALDEE8B
YTHERIVERCHo
BARANDUPONMEWAS
THEHANDOFTHELDANDILOOKEDANDLO
AWHIRLWNDCAMEOUTOF
THENORTHANDAGREATCLOUD
WITHIT
i Sigttot Zacagni's Letter to Dr. Grabe, dated Rome/ Nov. 29. 1704, in Dr. ICotinU
cotta DiBB.ii. pp. 408 411. Michaelis, vol. ii, parti, pp. 341850. Partii. pp. 810
820. Hug's Irvtrod, to the New Test, vol, i pp, S62 372,
* -f +
i-
Koc-ra>6"re i
IpMnT
rcu HM HN e/sr MS C ou
/UXM AXOOC/XC TDT^AC f
1 2^0 N
AH6MKYTUJ
. . .
/ / / / '
' //^ ^^' //rv//'* //'t**4- fj ^
, ,
r? _:</: f/tsffa , , ///<' // ?t
f/tsf , , ///<
f /
Sect. III. 3-] Containing the Septuagint Vision. 125
No fac-sirnile edition (like that of the Alexandrian New Testament
edited by Dr. Woide, and of the Old Testament by the Rev.
H. H. Baber) has ever been executed of the precious Vatican manu-
script. During the pontificate of Pius VI. the Abate Spoletti con-
templated the publication of it, for which purpose he delivered a
memorial to the Pope. No public permission was ever given : and
though the Pontiff's private judgment was not unfavourable to the
undertaking, yet, as his indulgence would have been no security
against the vengeance of the inquisition, Spoletti was obliged to
abandon his design. 1 It is, however, but just to add, that no ob-
stacles were thrown in the way of the collation of manuscripts in the
Vatican, for Dr. Holmes's critical edition of the Septuagint version,
of which some account will be found in pp. 37? 38. of the Appendix to
this volume.
3. ACCOUNT OF MANUSCRIPTS (ENTIRE OR IN PART) CONTAINING THE
SEPTUAGINT OR GREEK VERSION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
I. The Codex Cottonianus II. The Codex Sarravianus. IlL The
Codex Colbertinus. IV. The Codex Cczsareits, Argenteus, or Argent eo-
Purpureus. -V. The Codex Ambrosianus. VI. The Codex Coislinianus.
yjj B 'ih e Codex Basiliano-Vaticanus* VIII. The Codex Turicensis.
IT is not precisely known what number of manuscripts of the
Greek version of the Old Testament are extant. The highest num-
ber of those collated by the late Rev. Dr. Holmes, for his splendid
edition of this version, is one hundred and thirty-five. Nine of them
are described, as being written in uncial characters, and as having
furnished him with the most important of the various readings, with
which his first volume is enriched : besides these he has noticed sixty-
three others, written in cursive or small characters, and which have
likewise furnished him with various lections. Of these manuscripts
the following are more particularly worthy of notice, on account of
their rarity and value. 2
I. The CODEX COTTONIANUS is not only the most antient but the
mos't correct manuscript that is extant. It was originally brought
from Philippi by two Greek bishops, who presented it to King Henry
VIII. whom they informed that tradition reported it to have been the
identical copy, which had belonged to the celebrated Origen, who
lived in the former half of the third century. Queen Elizabeth gave
it to Sir John Fortescue, her preceptor in Greek, who, desirous of
preserving it for posterity, placed it in the Cottonian library. This
precious ^manuscript was almost destroyed by the calamitous fire
which consumed Cotton House at Westminster, in the year *17S1.
Eighteen fragments are all that now remain, and of these, both the
leaves, and consequently the writing in a just proportion, are con-
i Miohaelis, vol. ii. parti, p. 1 81., partii. pp. 644, ,645.
ft Our descriptions are chiefly abridged from Dr, Holraes's Praefatio ad Pentatouchum,
cap. ii. prefixed to the iirst volume of his critical edition of the Septuagint version pub-
lished at Oxford, in 1798, folio.
126 Account of Manuscripts [Part L Ch. III.
tracted into a less compass ; so that what were large are now small capi-
tals. These fragments are at present deposited in the British Museum. 1
In its original state,, the Codex Cottonianus contained one hundred
and sixty-five leaves, in the quarto size ; it is written on vellum, in
uncial characters, the line running along the whole width of the page,
and each line consisting, in general, of twenty-seven, rarely of thirty
letters. These letters are almost every where of the same length,
excepting that at the end of a line they are occasionally somewhat
less, and in some instances are interlined or written over. the line.
Like all other very an-tient manuscripts, it has no accents or spirits,
nor anv distinction of words fl verses, or chapters* The words are,
for the" most part, written at full length, witMhe^ceptipn^of the
well known and frequent abbreviations of KC, KN, C, N, for
Kwpioff and Kupwv, Lord, and *o? 9 wv, God. ^ Certain consonants^
vowels, and diphthongs are also interchanged. 2 The coherence of
the Greek Text is very close, except where it is divided by the inter-
position of the very curious paintings or illuminations with which this
manuscript is decorated. These pictures vere two hundred and fifty
In number, and consist of compositions within .square frames, of one
or of several figure^ in general not exceeding two inches in height;
and these frames, which are four inches square, ^^itesionally di-
vided into two compartments, The heads are perbtips.ljpo large, but
the attitudes and draperies have considerable merit: am they are by
competent judges preferred to the miniatures that adorn the Vienna
manuscript, which is noticed in pp. 128, 129. infra. Twenty-one
fragments of these illuminations were engraved, in 1 744, on two large
folio plates, at the expense of the Society of Antiquaries of London.
It is observed by Mr. PI an la, the present principal librarian of the
British Museum, that more fragments must have been preserved
than the eighteen which now remain ; because none of those en-
graved are now to be met with, ;l On an examination of the Codex
Cottonianusj with a view to take a flic-simile of some one of its frag-
ments for this wqj^Lj&ey were fouqd in a nearly pulverised and car-
bonised state, so'&at BO aecer&te'copy could be mncle. The annexed
engraving therefore is copM from that of the Antiquarian Society, 4
The subjeqt on tlfe ri,g!i^fiand o*WW& II. is Jacob delivering his son
Benjamin to his f brethren, that tliey may go a second tfnie into Egypt,
and buy corn for himself and his fifmily. The passage of Genesis,
which it is intended! to illustrate* .ja^.ttliii* 1% 14., of which the
following is a representation ^.^ff^^&eek charater$ j the words
o. . . *, , *f>T, -": , Msf'-'^r jfflT JEfc'i '
preserved being in capital letters, ., - ^ ~
1 Catalogue Bibliothecse Cpt^J$i58e, p. 865, (folio, 1802.) ' CJar^ >, Catalog Me of
MSS. in the King's library, pp. felix. , ( ?,.. ' ,' '*
2 These permutations were a fruitful flpoftA 4$" '^ors m tpanu$cr%t& Som0 irtetances
of them are given infra, Chap. V, HE ,, '/' ' "* ' .
s Catalogus Bibliothecse Cottoniana?, p. 36^5, , ,
* Vetusta Monumenta, quse ad Rerum Britannicarum Meitioriam Conservandam
Societas Antiquariorum sunnptu suo edenda 'curavit. Londini, 1747, folio, tern, i. PI.
No. VI. etVIL
Sect. III. 3.] Containing the Septuagint Version. 127
KAITONAAEAfcONTMOi/ Xa/Sere y.ai ava
2TANTE2KATABHTEHP02 T
TIONTOTAN@PnnOT'KAI
AAEA^ONTMONTON eW teat rwT&wt
AMEIN-ErOMENrAPKAea^ 4 row
MAIHTEKNaMAI.
In English, thus :
ALSOYOURBROTHER take, and a
RISEGOAGAINUNTOthe ma
N-ANDMAYC3DGIVE you favour be
FORETHEMANTHAT he may send back
YOURBROTHER and Benj
AMIN-ASFORMEAS I have been be
REAVEDOFCH1LDRENIAM bereaved.
The subject on the left-hand of the same plate is Joseph's interview
with his brethren in his own house, on their return into Egypt. It
illustrates Genesis xliii. 30, 31., and is as follows :
TPEMTOFAPTAENTEPA
EI2EAONAEEI2TOTAMEIov
ENEKEI-KAINI^AMENOSTO vpoo-unov
TlapaSfsrs
In English, thus :
And Joseph was discomposed'
FORhisBOWELSYEARNED
TOWARDSHISBROTHER-ANDheSOUGht where to weep-
ANDENTERINGINTOHlSCHAMBer, he we
PTTHERE-ANDWHENHEHADWASHED his face, and
cOMEFORTHHERESTRAINED himself- and said
set on bread.
The larger Greek characters at the foot of Plate I. are copied from
the third plate of Mr. Astle's work on the Origin of Writing : they
exhibit the four first words of Gen* xiv, 17. of the same size as in the
Codex Cottonianus Genesecos, before the calamitous fire above no-
ticed. The loss of the consumed parts of this precious manuscript
would have been irreparable, had not extracts of its various read-
ings been made by different learned men, which have been pre-
served to the present time. Thus the collations of it by Archbishop
Usher and Patrick Young, in the middle of the seventeenth century,
are printed in the sixth volume of Bishop Walton's Polyglott Edition
of the Bible. Archbishop Usher's autograph collation is deposited
in the Bodleian Library, among the other MSS. of that distinguished
prelate. The principal various readings, noted by Dr. Gale 3 towards
the close of the same century, are entered in the margin of an Aldine
edition of the Greek Version, which subsequently belonged to die
128 * Account of Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. III.
late Dr. Kennicott. But the most valuable collation is that made in
the year 1 703, by Dr. Grabe, who was deeply skilled in palaeography,
and bequeathed by him to the Bodleian Library, whence the late
Rev. Dr. Owen published it at London, in 1778, in an octavo volume,
Dr. Holmes has chiefly followed Grabe's extract of various readings,
in his critical edition of the Septuagint, but he has occasionally
availed himself of Archbishop Usher's collation. l
The Codex Cottonianus is the most antient manuscript of any part
of the Old Testament that is extant. It is acknowledged to have
been written towards the end of the fourth, or in the beginning of the
Jifth century ; and it seldom agrees with any manuscript or printed
edition, except the Codex Alexandrinus, which has been described
in pp. 116 122. of the present volume. There are, according to
Dr. Holmes, at least twenty instances in which this manuscript ex-
presses the meaning of the original Hebrew more accurately than
any other exemplars.
II. III. The Codices SARRAVIANUS (now in the Public Library
of the Academy at Leyden), and COLBERTINUS, (formerly numbered
3084. among the Colbert MSS., but at present deposited in the Royal
Library at Paris,) are distinct parts of the same manuscript, and con-
tain the Pentateuch, and the books of Joshua and Judges. The
Codex Sarravianus is defective in those very leaves, viz. seven in
Exodus, thirteen in Leviticus, and two in Numbers, which are found
in the Colbertine manuscript; the writing of which, as well as the
texture of the vellum, and other peculiarities, agree so closely with
those of the Codex Sarravianus, as to demonstrate their perfect
identity. These manuscripts are neatly written on thin vellum, in
uncial letters, with which some round characters are intermixed, the
ink of which is beginning to turn yellow. The contractions or
abbreviations, permutations of letters, &c. are the same which are
found in the Codex Cottonianus. These two Codices, as they are
termed, may be referred to the fifth or sixth century. To some
paragraphs of the book of Leviticus, titles or heads have been pre-
fixed, evidently by a later hand.
IV. The CODEX GZESAKEUS (which is also frequently called the
CODEX ARGENTEUS, and CODEX ARGENTEO-PURPUREUS, because
it is written in silver letters on purple velhim,) is preserved in the
Imperial Library at Vienna. The letters are beautiful but thick,
partly round and partly square. In size, it approximates to the quarto
form : it consists of twenty-six leaves only, the first twenty-four of
which contain a fragment of the book of Genesis, viz. from chapter
iii. 4. to chap, viiit 24. : the two last contain a fragment of St. Luke's
Gospel, viz. chapter xxiv. verses 21 49. In Wetstein's critical
edition of the Greek New Testament, these two leaves are denoted
by the letter N. The first twenty-four leaves are ornamented with
1 Another collation was made by the eminent critic, Crusius, who highly commended
the Codex Cottonianus in two dissertations published by him at Gottingen in 1744 and
1745. Crusius's collation subsequently foil into the hands of JBreitinger, the editor of the
beautiful edition of the Septuagint published at Zurich in 17301733, It is not at pre-
sent known what has become of this collation.
Sect. III. 3.] Containing the Septuagint Version. 129
forty-eight curious miniature paintings, which Lambecius refers to the
age of Constantine; but, from the shape of the letters, this manuscript
is rather to be assigned to the end of the fifth or the beginning of the
sixth century. In these pictures, the divine prescience and providence
are represented by a hand proceeding out of a cloud : and they ex-
hibit interesting specimens of the habits, customs, and amusements of
those early times. 1 From the occurrence of the words XITQW&$ (Kitonas)
instead of xirwvas (cuitonas), and A(3ifj,s\sx (AbimeleK) instead of
Aflipetex (AbimeleCH\ Dr. Holmes is of opinion that this manuscript
was written by dictation. Vowels, consonants. Sec. are interchanged in
the same manner as in the Coclex Cottonianus, and similar abbre-
viations are likewise found in it. In some of its readings the Codex
Csesareus resembles the Alexandrian manuscript. In his letter to the
Bishop of Durham, published in 1795, and containing a specimen of
his proposed new edition of the Septuagint version with various lec-
tions 2 , Dr. Holmes printed the entire text of this MS. which had
been collated and revised for him by Professor Alter, of Vienna ; and
he also gave an engraved fac-simile of the whole of its seventh page.
From this fac-simile our specimen is copied in Plate 5. No. 2. It is
the seventeenth verse of the fourteenth chapter of the book of Genesis,
and runs thus in ordinary Greek characters.
ANTHSINATTflMETATOANASTPE^AJATTO
AnOTH2KOnH2TONBA2IAEQN-EI2THN
KOIAAAATHN2ATH :
In English, thus, as nearly as the idiom of our language will allow :
ANDTHEKINGOFSODOMWENTOUT-TOME
ETHIMAFTERHISRETURN
FROMTHESLAUGHTEROFTHEKINGS-TOTHE
VALLEYOFSAVE:
V. The CODEX AMBROSIANUS derives its name from the Ambrosian
Library at Milan, where it is preserved : it is probably as old as the
seventh century, This manuscript is a large square quarto (by Mont-
faucori erroneously termed a folio), written in three columns in a
i The whole forty-eight embellishments are engraven in the third volume of Lam-
beciu&'s Commcntarioruin de augustissima bibliotheca Cffisarea-Viudobonensi, libriviiL
(Vindobonffi, 1GG3 1G79, folio, S vols.) They are also republkhed in Ncssclius's Bre-
viarum ct Supplementum Commentariorum Bibliothecse Caesarese-Vindohonensis (Vindo*
bonze, 6 parts, in 2 vols. folio), vol.i. pp.55 102. : and again in the third book or volume
of Kollarius's second edition of Lambecius's Commentarii (Vindobonaj, 1766 1782,
8 vols. folio). Montfaucon'h fac-simile of ihe characters (Palaeographia Grseca, p, 194.)
has been made familiar to English readers by a portion of it, which has been copied by Mr.
Astle (on the Origin of Writing, plate iii. p. 70.) : but his engraver is said by Dr. Bib-
din (Bibliographical Decameron, vol. i. p. xliv.) to have deviated from the original, and
to have executed the fac-simile in too heavy a manner. Dr. D has himself given a most
beautiful foe simile of one of the pictures of this MS. in the third volume of his Biblio-
graphical and Antiquarian Tour in France and Germany.
a Honorabili et admodum Reverendo, Shute Barrington, LL. D. Episcopo Dunelm-
ensi, Epistola, complexa Geneain ex Codice Purpureo-Argenteo Caesareo-Vindobonensi
cxpressam, et Testament! Veteris Grffici, Versionia Septuaginta-viralis cum Variis Lec-
tionibus denuo cdendi, Specimen. Dedit Robertus Holmes, S. T.-F. e Collegio Novo,
ct nuperrime Publicusiu Academia Oxoniensi Poetices Prselector. Oxonii, MDCCXGV.
folio.
VOL. II.
130 Account of Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. III.
round uncial character. The accents and spirits however have evi-
dently been added by a later hand,
VI. The CODEX COISLINIANUS originally belonged to M. Seguier,
Chancellor of France in the middle of the seventeenth century, a
munificent collector of biblical manuscripts, from whom it passed, by
hereditary succession, to the Due de Coislin. From his library it
was transferred into that of the monastery of Saint Germain-Des-Prez,
and thence into the Royal Library at Paris, where it now is. Ac-
cording to Montfaucon, by whom it is particularly described 1 9 it is
in quarto, and was written in a beautiful round uncial character, in
the sixth} or at the latest in the seventh century. But the accents and
spirits have been added by a comparatively recent hand. It consists of
two hundred and twenty-six leaves of vellum, and formerly contained
the octateuch) (that is the five books of Moses, and those of Joshua,
Judges, and Ruth,) the two books of Samuel and the two books of
Kings; but it is now considerably mutilated by the injuries of time.
The copyist was totally ignorant of Hebrew, as is evident from the
following inscription., which he has placed at the beginning of the
book of Genesis : Bagvj<re$ Traga Ej3gaioj, oTsg eoriv EJU.VHLJO/JC,EVOV,
Aoyot vipegtov, that is, Baprjo-g^ in Hebrew^ which being interpreted is
(or means) the Words of Days, or the history of the days, i.e the history
of the six days' work of creation. This word Ba^crsS (Bareseth] is
no other than the Hebrew word rVEWID (B^RESHITH) in the begin-
nings which is the first word in the book of Genesis, Montfaucon
further observed that this manuscript contained readings very similar
to those of the Codex Alexandrinus ; and his remark is confirmed by
Dr. Holmes, so far as respects the Pentateuch.
VII. The CODEX BASILIANO- VATICAN us is the last of the MSS.
in uncial characters collated by Dr. H. It formerly belonged to a
monastery in ^Calabria, whence it was transferred by Pietro Memniti,
superior of the monks of the order of Saint Basil at Rome into the
library of his monastery ; and thence it passed into the papal library
of the Vatican, where it is now numbered 2,106. It is written on
vellum, in oblong leaning uncial characters j and according to Mont-
faucon was executed in the ninth century. Dr. Holmes considers it
to be a manuscript of considerable value and importance, which,
though in many respects it corresponds with the other MSS. collated
by him, yet contains some valuable lections which are no where
else to be found. On this account it is to be regretted that the Codex
Basiliano-Vaticanus is imperfect both at the beginning and end.
VIIL The CODEX TURICENSIS is numbered 262 in Mr. Parson's
catalogue of MSS. collated for the book of Psalms, in his continu-
ation of the magnificent edition of the Septuagint commenced by the
late Rev. Dr. Holmes. It is a quarto manuscript of the book of
Psalms, the writing of which proves it to have been executed at least
in the eleventh century, if not much earlier; and consists of two hun-
dred and twenty-two leaves of extremely thin purple vellum ; and the
silver characters and golden initial letters are in many parts so de-
* Bibliotheca Coisliniana, olira Seguieriana, folio, Paris, 17S2 t
Sect, III. 4-.] Containing the New Testament. 131
cayed by the consuming hand of time, as to be with difficulty legible.
The portions of the psalms wanting in this MS. are Psal. i. xxv. ;
xxx. 1. xxxvi. 20.; xli. 5. xliii. 2.; Iviii. 13. lix. 4. ; Ixiv. II.
Ixxi. 4. ; xcii. 3. xciii. 7. ; and xcvi. 12. xcvii. 8. Several of the
antient ecclesiastical hymns, which form part of this MS., are also
mutilated. It is, however, consolatory to know that those portions
of the psalms which are deficient in the Codices Alexandrinus and
Vaticanus, may be supplied from the Codex Turicensis l : and this
circumstance, it should seem, occasioned the generally accurate
traveller, Mr. Coxe (whose error has been implicitly copied by suc-
ceeding writers) to state that the MS. here described once formed
part of the Codex Vaticanus. 2
4. ACCOUNT OF THE PRINCIPAL MANUSCRIPTS CONTAINING THE NEW
TESTAMENT ENTIRE OR IN PART.
L The Codex Cottonianus. (Titus C. KV.) II. The Codex Bezce, or Can-
tabrigiensis. III. The Codex Ephremi. IV. The Codex Claromon-
tamis. V. The Codex Argenteus. MSS. of the Gothic Version dis-
covered by signor Mai. VI. The Codex Rescript us of St. Mat-
thew's Gospel in Trinity College, Dublin* VII. The Codex Lau-
dianus, 3. VIII. The Codex Coislinianus. IX. The Codex Boerne-
rianus. X. The Codex Cyprius. XL The Codex Basileensis E.
XII. The Codex San-Gerrnanensis. XIII. The Codex Augiensis.
XIV. The Codex Harleianus, 5598. XV. The Codex Regius or Ste-
phanityXVL The Codex Uffenbachianus* XVII. The Codices
Manners- SuttorrianL XVIJI. The Codices Mosquenses. XIX. The
Codex Bnxiensis. XX. Other MSS. written in small characters and
deserving of especial notice, viz. 1. The Codex Basileensis, 1. 2* The
Codex Berolinensis. 3. The Codex Corsendoncensis. 4. TJie Codex
Montfortianus. 5. The Codex Meermanniamis. 6. The Codex Re-
gius, 50. 7. The Codex Leicestrensis. 8. The Codex Vindobonensis,
9. The Codex Ebnerianus. 10. The Codex Ottobonianus. XXI. No-
tice of the Collations of the Barberini and Velesian Manuscripts.
THE autographs, or manuscripts of the New Testament, which
were written either by the apostles themselves, or by amanuenses
under their immediate inspection 3 , have long since perished; and
we have no information whatever concerning their history. The
pretended autograph of St. Mark's Gospel at Venice is now known
to be nothing more than a copy of the Latin version 4 , and no exist-
ing manuscripts of the New Testament can be traced higher than
the fourth century ; and most of them are of still later date. Some
contain the whole of the New Testament; others comprise particular
1 The preceding description of the Codex Turicensis is abridged from Professor Brei-
tingor's scarce tract, addressed to Cardinal Quirini, and intitled " De antiquissimo
Turicensis Bibliolhccae Greeco Psalmorum Libro, Epistola. TuriqL 1748," 4to.
2 See Coxe's Travels in Switzerland, in Pinkerton's Collection of Voyages and Tra-
vels, vol. vi. p. 672. 4to.
3 Saint Paul dictated most of his epistles to amanuenses ; but, to prevent the circulation
of spurious letters, he wrote the concluding benediction with his own hand, Compare
Rom. xvi. 22, Gal. vi, 11. and 2 Thess, iii. 17, 18. with 1 Qor.xvi. 21.
4 See Vol. IV, Part II. Ch. II. Sect. Ill, V. infra.
K 2
1 32 Account of the Principal Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. III.
books or fragments of books ; and there are several \vhich contain,
not whole books arranged according to their usual order, but de-
tached portions or lessons (avayvoxreij), appointed to be read on cer-
tain days in the public service of the Christian church; from which
again whole books have been put together. These are called Lee-
tionaria^ and are of two sorts: 1. Evangeli$teria> containing lessons
from the four Gospels; am1 3 2. Apostolos^ comprising lessons from
the Acts and Epistles, and sometimes only the Epistles themselves.
When a manuscript contains both parts, Michaelis says that it is
called Apostolo-Evangdion. Forty-six Evangel isleria were collated
by Griesbach for the'fouv Gospels of his edition of the New Testa-
ment ; and seven Lectionaria or Apostoli, for the Acts and Epistles. 1
Some manuscripts, again, have not only the Greek text, but are ac-
companied with a version, which is either interlined, or in a parallel
column ; these are called Codices Bilingues. The greatest number
is in Greek and Latin ; and the Latin version is, in general, one of
those which existed before the time of Jerome. As there are extant
Syriac-Arabic and Gothic-Latin manuscripts, Midbaelis thinks it
probable that there formerly existed Greek-Syriac, Greek-Gothic,
and other manuscripts of that kind, in wMcK the original and some
version were written together, 2 Wherf a tf|nsiriber, to slea d of
copying from one and the same antien* nwracnpt? selects from
several those readings, which appear to him* to be the best, the
manuscript so transcribed is termed a Codex Criticus. ^ ^
Besides the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscMp^f wlMch have
been already described, the following are the principal manuscripts
of the New Testament, of every description, which are more peculi-
arly worthy of notice.
I. The CODEX COTTONIANUS (Titus C. XV.), pre&ervf tt in the
Cottonian Library in the British Museum, is a most preefcus frag-
ment of the four Gospels, written in silver letters, on a faded purple
ground. It is one of the oldest (if not the most antient) manuscript
of any part of the New Testament that iStextenttf and contains^
JU) Part of Saint Matthew's Gospel, beginning at Chapter XXVI. v. 57-
ending with v. 65- of the same Chapter.
(2.) Part of the same Gospel, beginning at Chapter XXVII. v.26. and
ending with v. 34<. of the same Chapter.
(3.) Part of Saint John's Gospel, beginning at Chapter XIV. v. 2, and
ending with v. 10. of the same Chapter.
(4.) Part of the same Gospel, beginning at Chapter XV, v. 15. and
ending with v. 22. of the same Chapter.
In the accompanying Plate 3. No. 1. we have given a fac-simile
of John xiv. 6. from this manuscript, of which the following is a
J Griesbach, Proleg, ad Nov. Test. torn, i, pp, cxix.. cxxii. In the second volume
of his Symbolas Criiicae, (pp. 3 30. i Dr. G. has described eleven important Evange-
listeria, which had either been not collated before, or were newly examined and collated
by himself. Michaelis, vol. ii. parti, pp.161 103. part ii. 639, 640, The Rev. Dr.
Dibdin has described a superb Evangelisturium, and has given fac-simiU'S of its ornaments,
in the first volume of his Bibliographical Decameron, pp. xcii. xciv. This precious
manuscript is supposed to have been written at the close of the eleventh, or early in the
thirteenth century. The illuminations are executed with singular beauty and delicacy.
s Introduction to the New Test. vol. ii. part. i. p. 164,
OWNFICTONKOA
r*>
6lMHXl6MOr
. GftAe Code,
Sect. III. 4.] Containing the New Testament. 1 33
representation in ordinary Greek characters, with the corresponding
literal English version.
AErEurroois SAITHUNTOHIMJS
EFIiEIMEIHO IAMTHEW
A02KAIHAAH AYANDTHETRU
01 AK ATHZmi TH ANDTHELIFE
OTAlSEPXETAi NOMANCOMExH
UNTOTHEFTHR
EIMHAIEMOr BUTBYME
The words 1H20TS (Jesus), @E02 (God), KTPIO2 (Lord),
TIOS (Son), and 2&THP (Saviour), are written in letters of gold;
the three first with contractions similar to those in the Codex Alex-
andrinusj and Codex Bezse. This precious fragment is acknowledged
to have been executed at the end of the fourth, or at the latest in
the beginning of the fifth century.
II. The CODEX BEZ;E, also called the CODEX CANTABRTGIENSIS,
is a Greek and Latin manuscript, containing the four Gospels and
the Acts of the Apostles. It is deposited in the public library of the
university of Cambridge, to which it was presented by the celebrated
Theodore Beza, in the year 1581. Of this manuscript which is
written on vellum, in quarto, without accents or marks of aspiration,
or spaces between the words, the accompanying fac-simile will con-
vey an idea. It represents the first three verses of the fifth chapter
of Saint Matthew's Gospel, which are copied from Dr. Kipling's fac-
simile edition of the Codex Beza?, published at Cambridge in J793,
of which an account is given in pp. 20, 21. of the Appendix to this
volume. We have placed the Latin under the Greek, in order to
bring the whole within the compass of an octavo page. The follow-
ing is a literal English version of this fac-simile.
Matt. V. 1 3.
ANDSEEINGTHEMULTITUDESI-IEWENTUPINTOAMOUNTAIN
ANDWHENHEWASSETDOWN-CAMETOH1M
HISDISCIPLES'ANDOPEMNGHISMOUTH
HETAUGHTTHEMSAY1NG
_ t
BLESSED^flETHEPOORiNSPT:FORTHEIRSIS
THEK1NGDOMOFHEAVEN.
Sixty-six leaves of this manuscript are much torn arid mutilated,
ten of them have been supplied by a later transcriber.
The Codex Bezse is noted with the letter D. by Wetstein and
Griesbach. In the Greek it is defective, from the beginning to
Matt i. 20., and in the Latin to Matt. i. 12. In the Latin it has
likewise the following chasms, viz. Matt. vi. 20. ix. 2. ; Matt, xxvii.
1 12.; John i. 16. ii. 26.; Acts viil 29- x. 14.; xxii. 10 20.;
f Contracted for SPIRIT. The Greek is HNI, TINETMATT; and the Latin Sru, for
SFIIIITU.
K 3
134? Account oftJie Principal Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. III.
and from xxii. 29. to the end. The Gospels are arranged in the
usual order of the Latin manuscripts, Matthew, John, Luke, Mark,
It has a considerable number of corrections, some of which have
been noticed by Dr. Griesbach; and some of the pages, containing
Matt. iii. 8 16. John xviii. 13. xx. 13. and Markxv. to the end,
are written by a later hand, which Wetstein refers to the tenth cen-
tury, but Griesbach to the twelfth. The Latin version is that which
was in use before the time of Jerome, and is usually called the Old
Italic or Ante-Hieronymian version. In the margin of the Greek
part of the manuscript there are inserted the Ammonian sections,
evidently by a later hand ; and the words apxy> reXog, xai Asrys, cotis
G-1yxe, are occasionally interspersed, indicating the beginning and end
of the Avayvwo-^oira, or lessons read in the church. The subjects
discussed in the Gospels are sometimes written in the margin, some-
times at ihe top of the page. But all these notations are manifestly
the work of several persons and of different ages. The date of this
manuscript has been much contested. Those critics who give it
the least antiquity, assign it to the sixth or seventh century. Wet-
stein supposed it to be of the fifth century. Michaelis was of opi-
nion, that of all the manuscripts now extant, this is the moat antient.
Dr. Kipling, the editor of the Cambridge fac-simile, thought it much
older than the Alexandrian manuscript, and that it must have been
written in the second century. On comparing it with Greek inscrip-
tions of different ages, Bishop Marsh is of opinion that it cannot
have been written later than the sixth century, and that it may have
been written even two or three centuries earlier : and he finally con-
siders it prior to all the manuscripts extant, except the Codex Vati-
canus, and refers it to the fifth century, which, perhaps, is the true date,
if an opinion may be hazarded where so much uncertainty prevails.
Wetstein was of opinion, from eleven coincidences which he
thought he had discovei*ed, that this was the identical manuscript
collated at Alexandria in 616, for the Philoxenian or later Syriac
version of the New Testament ; but this is a groundless supposition.
It is, however, worthy of remark, that many of the readings by which
the Codex Bezse is distinguished are found in the Syriac, Coptic,
Sahidic, and in the margin of the Philoxenian- Syriac version. As
the readings of this manuscript frequently agree with the Latin ver-
sions before the time of St. Jerome, and with the Vulgate or present
Latin translation, Wetstein was of opinion that the Greek text was
altered from the Latin version, or, in other words, that the writer of
the Codex Bezae departed from the lections of the Greek manuscript
or manuscripts whence he copied, and introduced in their stead,
from some Latin version, readings which were warranted by no
Greek manuscript. This charge Sender, Michaelis, Griesbach, and
Bishop Marsh have endeavoured to refute ; and their verdict has
been generally received, Matthaei, however, revived the charge of
Wetstein, and considered the text as extremely corrupt, and sus-
pected that some Latin monk, who was but indifierently skilled in
Greek, wrote in the margin of his New Testament various passages
from the Greek and Latin fathers, which seemed to refer to parti-
Sect. III. 4.] Containing the New Testament. 135
cular passages. He further thought that this monk had noted the
differences occurring in some Greek and Latin manuscripts of the
New Testament, and added parallel passages of Scripture : and that
from this farrago either the monk himself, or some other person,
manufactured his text (whether foolishly or fraudulently is uncertain),
of which the Codex Bezse is a copy. But this suspicion of Matthaei
has been little regarded in Germany 5 where he incurred the anti-
pathy of the most eminent biblical critics, by vilifying the sources of
various readings from which he had it not in his power to draw,
when he began to publish his edition of the New Testament ; giving
to the Codex Bezse, the Codex Claromontanus (noticed in pp. 1 37,
138. infra\ and other manuscripts of unquestionable antiquity, the
appellation of Editio Scurrilis. l Bishop Middleton considers the judg-
ment of Michaelis as approximating very near to the truth, and has
given a collation of numerous passages of the received text with the
Codex Bezae ; and the result of his examination, which does not
admit of abridgment, is, that the Codex Bezag, though a most vener-
able remain of antiquity, is not to be considered, in a critical view,
as of much authority. He accounts for the goodness of its readings,
considered with regard to the sen.se.> by the natural supposition of the
great antiquity of the manuscript, which was the basis of the Codex
Bezas ; but while its latinising is admitted, he contends that we have
no reason to infer that its readings, considered in the same light, are
therefore faulty. The learned prelate concludes with subscribing
to the opinion of Matthsei somewhat modified. He believes that no
fraud was intended ; but only that the critical possessor of the basis
filled its margin with glosses and readings chiefly from the Latin,
being a Christian of the Western Church ; and that the whole col-
lection of Latin passages was translated into Greek, and substituted
in the text by some one who had a high opinion of their value, and
who was better skilled in caligraphy than in the Greek and Latin
languages. 2 The arguments and evidences adduced by Bishop Mid-
dleton, we believe, are by many, at least in England, considered so
conclusive, that, though the antiquity of the manuscript is fully ad-
mitted, yet it must be deemed a latinising manuscript, and, conse-
quently, is of comparatively little critical value.
At- the time Beza presented this manuscript to the university of
Carnbridge, it had been in his possession about nineteen years ; and
in his letter to that learned body he says, that it was found in the
monastery of Saint Irenaeus at Lyons, where it had lain concealed
for a long time. But how it came there, and in what place it was
written, are questions concerning which nothing certain is known.
The most generally received opinion is, that it was written in the
west of Europe.
The Cambridge manuscript has been repeatedly collated by criti-
cal editors of the New Testament. Robert Stephens made extracts
from it, though with no great accuracy, under the title of Codex /3,
for his edition of the Greek Testament, of 1550 ; as Beza also did
1 Bp, Marsh's Lectures, partii. pp, 30, 3K
2 Bishop Middleton on the Greek Article, pp. 677 398,, first edition.
K 4*
3 26 Account of the principal Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. lH.
for his own edition published in 1582. Since it was sent to the uni-
versity of Cambridge, it has been more accurately collated by Junius,
whose extracts were used by Curcellaeus and Father Morin. A fourth
and more accurate collation of it was made, at the instigation of
Archbishop Usher, and the extracts were inserted in the sixth vo-
lume of the London Polyglott, edited by Bishop Walton. Dr. Mill
collated it a fifth and sixth time ; but that his extracts are frequently
defective, and sometimes erroneous, appears from comparing them
with Wetstein's New Testament, and from a new collation which was
made, about the year 1733, by Mr. Dickenson of Saint John's Col-
lege ; which is now preserved in the library of Jesus' College, where
it is marked O, 0, 2. Wetstein's extracts are also very incor-
rect, as appears from comparing them with the manuscript itself. 1
A splendid fac-simile of the Codex Bezse was published by the
Rev. Dr. Kipling at Cambridge, under the patronage and at the
expense of the university, in 1793, in 2 vols. atlas folio. Dr. Har-
wood regulated the text of the Gospels and Acts, in his edition of the
Greek Testament, chiefly according to the readings of the Codex
Bezse ; which was so highly valued by the learned but eccentric
divine, Winston, that in his 4 Primitive New Testament in English/*
(Svo. Stamford and London, 1745,) he has translated the four Gos-
pels and Acts literally from this manuscript. Dr. A, Clarke, in his
Commentary on the New'Testament, has paid very particular atten-
tion to the readings of the Codex Bezae.
III. The CODEX EPHREMI, or CODEX REGIUS, 1905., (at present
9.) by Wetstein and Griesbach noted with the letter C., is an in-
valuable Coclex Rescriptus, written on vellum, and is of very high
antiquity. The first part of this manuscript contains several Greek
works of Ephrem the Syrian, written over some more antient writ-
ings which had been erased, though the traces are still visible, and
in most places legible. These more antient writings were the entire
Greek Bible. In the New Testament, there are very numerous
chasms, which are specified by Wetstein, from whom they have
been copied by Michaelis and Griesbach. The text is not divided
into columns; the uncial characters are larger than those of the
Codex Alexandrinus, without accents, and the words are not di-
vided. There are large initial letters at the beginning of each sec-
tion; and the text is sometimes divided into articles, not much
larger than our verses. A small cross indicates the end of a divi-
sion ; a full point below a letter is equivalent to a comma, and in
the middle to a semi-colon. The Gospels follow the divisons of
Ammonius, and also have the -H-rAo*, dprimd manu ; the sections of
the epistles sometimes agree with the avayvw(rei$ or lessons occurring
in the MSS. which are known to have been written in Egypt. The
titles and subscriptions to the several books are very brief, without
any of the additions which are sometimes found in the Codex Alex-
andnnus. The Coclex Ephrem i exhibits the text of the Alexan-
1 Millii Prolegomena, 1268 1273. Gricubach, Symbols) Critics;, torn, i. pp.lv.
Ixiv. Michaelis, vol. iii. parti, pp.228 242. and partii. pp, 679 721. Hug's
Introd. vol. i. pp. 275 278,
Sect. III. 4-.] Containing the Ne^> Testament. 137
drine Recension in its greatest purity, and numerous other indi-
cations of its Egyptian origin. In this manuscript the disputed verse,
John v. 4., is written, not in the text 5 but as a marginal scholion.
Wetstein conjectured, that this was one of the manuscripts that were
collated at Alexandria in 616 with the new Syriac version; but of
this there is no evidence. From a marginal note to Heb. viii. 7. the
same critic also argued, that it was written before the institution of
the feast of the Virgin Mary ; that is, before the year 542. But his
arguments are not considered as wholly decisive by Michaelis, who
only asserts its great antiquity in general terms. Bishop Marsh
pronounces it to be at least as antient as the seventh century; and Pro-
fessor Hug considers it to be even older than the Codex Alexan-
drinus. The readings of the Codex Ephremi, like those of all other
very antient manuscripts, are in favour of the Latin ; but there is no sa-
tisfactory evidence that it has been corrupted from the Latin version.
It has been altered by a critical collator, who, according to Gries-
bach, must have lived many years after the time when the manuscript
was written, and who probably erased many of the antient readings.
Kuster was the first who procured extracts from this manuscript for
his edition of Dr. Mill's Greek Testament. Wetstein has collated
it with very great accuracy; and the numerous readings he has
quoted from it greatly enhance the value of his edition. 1
IV. The CODEX CLAROMONTANUS, or REGIUS 2245., is a Greek-
Latin manuscript of St. Paul's Epistles, found in the monastery of
Clermont, in the diocese of Beauvais, and used by Beza, together
with the Codex Cantabrigiensis, in preparing his edition of the New
Testament. It follows the Western Recension, and is noted JD. by
Wetstein and Griesbach in the second volumes of their respective
editions of the Greek Testament. Sabatier supposes it to have been
written in the sixth century ; Montfaucon places it in the seventh
century; Griesbach thinks it was written in the sixth or seventh
century, and Hug, in the eighth century. This manuscript is writ-
ten on vellum in uncial characters, and with accents and marks of
aspiration added by another hand, but of great antiquity. As it
contains the Epistle to the Hebrews, which has been added by a
later hand, it is supposed to have been written in the west of Europe*
Dr. Mill contended that the Codex Claromontanus was the second
part of the Codex Bezoe; but this opinion has been confuted by
Wetstein, who has shown that the former is by no means connected
with the latter, as appears from the difference of their form> their
orthography, and the nature of the vellum on which they are written*
Bishop Marsh adds, on the authority of a gentleman who had exa-
mined both manuscripts, that the Codex Claromontanus contains only
twenty-one lines in each page, while the Cambridge manuscript con^
tains thirty-three lines in a page ; the abbreviations in the two maim-*
1 ^Wetstcnii Nov. Test, torn, i, Proleg. pp. 27, 28. Grresbach's Symb. Grit. torn. I*
pp. I Uv, and Nov. Test, torn, i, pp. ci. cii. Micbaelis, vol. ii. part i. pp. 258 2GO<
pan ii. pp. 787, 738. Hug's Introduction, vol. i. pp. 271273. See also the Palrco-.
graphia Gneca of Montfaucon (pp. 213, 214.) who has given a fac-siraile of this man IN
script, which Professor I Jug says is not equal to the elegance of this codex.
138 Account of the principal Manuscripts [Parti. Ch. III.
scripts are also different. The Codex Claromontanus, like other
Greek-Latin manuscripts, has been accused of having a Greek Text,
that has been altered from the Latin; but this charge has been satis-
factorily refuted by Dr. Semler. The migrations of this manuscript
are somewhat remarkable. From the hands of Beza it went into
the Putean library, which derived its name from the family of De
Puy. Jacques De Puy, who was librarian to the king of France,
and died in 1656, bequeathed it, together with his other manuscripts,
to the Royal Library at Paris, where it is now preserved, and at pre-
sent is marked 107. According to the accounts of Wetstein and
Sabatier, thirty-six leaves were cut out of it at the beginning of the
last century, (it is supposed by John Aymon, a notorious literary
thief of that time,) and were sold in England; but they were sent
back by the Earl of Oxford in 1729. The manuscript, therefore, is
once more complete, as the covering only is wanting in which the
stolen sheets had been enclosed, which is kept in the British Mu-
seum, and filled with the letters that passed on the occasion, as a
monument of this infamous theft. 1
V. The CODEX ARGENTEUS is a manuscript containing the four
Gospels, in the Gothic version of Ulphilas' 2 , which is preserved in
the university of UpsaL It is written on vellum, and has received
the name of Argenteus from its silver letters; it is of a quarto
size, and the vellum leaves are stained with a violet colour ; and on
this ground the letters, which are all uncial or capitals, were aftei'-
wards painted in silver, except the initial characters and a few other
passages, which are in gold. The cover and back of the volume
are of silver embossed. From the deep impression of the strokes,
Ihre, Michaelis, and Hug are of opinion, that the letters were either
imprinted with a warm iron, cut with a graver, or cast for the
purpose, and afterwards coloured ; but Mr. Coxe, (with whom the
late eminent traveller Dr. E. D. Clarke seems to coincide,) after a
very minute examination, was convinced that each letter was painted,
and not formed in the manner supposed by those critics. Most of
the silver letters have become green by time, but the golden letters
are still in good preservation. We have no knowledge of this im-
portant manuscript prior to the discovery of it in the abbey of
Werden in Westphalia, whence it was taken to Prague. In the
year 161<8, when that city was stormed by the Swedes, it fell into
the hands of a Swedish count, who presented it to his sovereign, queen
Christina. After remaining some time in her library, during the
confusion which preceded her abdication of the throne of Sweden,
it suddenly and unaccountably disappeared, and was again brought
to light in the Netherlands. Some have supposed that the cele-
brated Isaac Vossius received it as a present from the Queen ; others,
that he brought it away by stealth. After his death, however, it
was purchased for six hundred dollars by count Magnus Gabriel de
la Gardie, who pi'esentecl it to the university of Upsal, where it
i MichaeltSj vol. ii, parti, pp.244 248. partii. pp.724 728* Griesbach, Symbol
Criticae, tom. i. pp, Iv. Ixiv. Hug, vol. i. pp. 28O 282.
8 See an account of this version, $vipra } pp. 7o, 76.
Sect. III. 4-.] Containing the Neto Testament. 139
at present remains. The following cut is a faithful fac-simile of
the characters of the Codex Argenteus : it was traced from the ma-
nuscript itself for the late Dr. E. D. Clarke, and is the most correct
fac-simile known to be extant. It corresponds with our version of
Luke xviii. 1 7. Verity, I say unto you^ Whosoever shall not receive
the kingdom of God as a httle child, shall in no wise enter therein.
It is worthy of remark, that, in the Codex Argenetus, the well
known old Saxon or Gothic word Bam, is used to signify the origi-
nal word niSioi/ 5 a little child.
Concerning the age of this venerable manuscript, critics are by no
means agreed* Some of the zealous advocates for its antiquity have
maintained that it is the very copy which Ulphilas wrote with his
own hand. The librarian by whom it was exhibited to Dr. Clarke
stated it to have been completed about the end of the fourth century,
by a bishop of Thrace, in the Gothic language used at that time in
Mcesia. This brings its age very nearly, if not quite, to the time
when Ulphilas lived : but it is not likely indeed it is utterly im-
probable that the only copy of the Gothic translation of the Gos-
pels, which is now extant, should be precisely the original. What
proves that this capnot be the identical MS. of Ulphilas, is the fact,
that several various readings have been discovered in the margin, a
circumstance which clearly shows that it must have been written at
a time when several transcripts had been already made.
Some fragments of the Gothic version of St. Paul's Epistle to the
Romans were discovered by M. Knittel, in the year 1756, in a Codex
Rescriptus belonging to the library of the Duke of Brunswick at
Wolfenbiittel : they were published by him in 1762, and reprinted
in 1763, in 4-to., at Upsal, with notes by Ihre. The Brunswick ma-
nuscript contains the version of Ulphilas in one column, and a Latin
translation in the other: it is on vellum, and is supposed to be of the
sixth century. In the eighth or ninth century, the Origines Isidori
Hispalensis were written over the translation of Ulphilas; but the
ink had become so exceedingly pale as not to admit of deciphering
,the original manuscript without great difficulty. 1
In the year 1817, a most important discovery was made among
the Codices Rescript!, in the Ambrosian library at Milan, by signor
1 Michaelis, vol.ii. pp.lttO 153. 631~~635. Semler, pp. 70 72. Viser, Herraeneut.
Nov. Test. vol. ii, part iii. pp. 58. Schoell, Histoire Abrg6 de la Literature
Grecque, torn. ii. p. 131. Hug, vol. i. pp. 488 498. Coxe's Travels in Russia, &c.
vol. iv. pp. 173180. edit, 1802. Dr. E, D. Clarke's Travels, vol. vi. pp.183, 184. 4to.
14*0 Account of tJie principal Manuscripts [Parti. Ch. III.
Angelo Mai', who is at present keeper of the manuscript-department
of the Vatican library. While this indefatigable explorer of antient
literature was examining two Codices Rescript! in the Ambrosian,
library, he was surprised with the discoveiy of some Gothic writing
in one of them ; which on further investigation proved to be frag-
ments of the books of Kings, Ezra, and Nehemiah. The discovery
thus auspiciously made, stimulated him to further inquiries, which
were rewarded with the discovery of four other Codices Rescript!
containing portions of the Gothic version. He now associated in
his researches, signer Carole Ottavio Castillionei ; and to their joint
labours we are indebted for a specimen and account 1 of these manu-
scripts, from which the following particulars are abridged.
Thejirst of these five Gothic MSS. (which is noted S. 36.) consists of
204 quarto pages on vellum ; the later writing contains the homilies of
Gregory the Great on the Prophecies of Ezekiel, winch from their cha-
racters must have been executed before the eighth century. Beneath
this, in a more antient Gothic hand, are contained the Epistles of St,
Paul to the Romans, 1st and 2d Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians,
Colossians, 1st and 2d of Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, together with
a fragment of the Gothic Calendar. The Epistles to the Romans, Co-
rinthians, Ephesians, and to Timothy, are very nearly entire, and form
the chief part of this MS. : of the other Epistles, considerable fragments
only remain. The titles of the Epistles may be traced at the heads of
the pages where they commence. This MS. appears to have been writ-
ten by two different copyists, one of whom wrote more beautifully and
correctly than the other s and various readings may be traced in some
of the margins written in a smaller hand. Entire leaves have been
turned upside down by the rescriber of this MS. A fac-simile specimen
of this manuscript is given in the accompanying Plate 5. No. 1. It re-
presents the commencement of Paul's Epistles to the Ephesians, and
may be thus rendered : The Epistle of Paul to the, Ephesians begin neth.
Paul) an apostle of Jesus Christ according to the will of God) to the saints
who are at Ephcsus.
. The second MS. also, in quarto, and noted S. 45, s contains 156 pages of
thinner vellum, the Latin writing on which is of the eighth or ninth cen-
tury, and comprises Jerome's exposition of Isaiah, Under this has been
discovered, (though with some difficulty, on account of the thickness of
the Latin characters arv*MJyf\ blackness o| the ink,) the fJothic version of
Saint Paul's two Epistiesfto tlfe Corinthians, the Gfaljftians, Ephesians,
Philippians, Colossians, the two Epistles to the Thessalonians and to Titus.
What is deficient in the pre^il^ng MS- is fourid in this, which has some
various readings peculiar to itself, and therefore is ari independent codex,
In the third manuscript, noted G. 82., a quarto Latin volume, contain-
ing the plays of Plautus, and part of Seneca's Tragedies of Medea and
CEdipus, signer Mat discovered fragments of the Books of Kings, Ezra,
and Nehemiah, This discovery is peculiarly valuable, as not the smallest
portion of the Gothic version of the Old Testament was known to be in
existence ; and, further, as it furnishes a complete refutation of the idle
tale repeated by Gibbon after preceding writers, viz. that Ulphilas pru-
dently suppressed the four Books of Kings, as they might tend to irritate
the fierce and sanguinary spirit of his countrymen. 2 The date of the
1 Ulpbil Pnrtiuin Ineditarum, in Ambrosianis Palimpscstis ab Angelo Maio reper-
tarmn, Specimen, conjuiictis curis cjusdem Maii el Carol! Octavii Ca&tillionasi editum,
Mediolani, Regiis Typis, M, DCCC. XIX, 4to. Q Decline and Fall, \ol.\i. p,269.
^,,, ,",.
. //,'/ .
/V^ /j/ I/?'/// 1 -*/',}. ///
r 6JOXQI\fICJD NG I CCyN
XTO^N^C T^G^AIX
[ B XGI X 6 CJDN'EICTHN
//,
' ( s>s/s:r (v*.s////M r, //_ X^/v
6lH/\eGNA,6 BAIC1 A 3 V^^O J^OISjICJD N G I Ccy N
A NTH GIN XV T-CJDly 6TXTOANAC
2k.TTO THCKT01IHCT DN B A.CI X 6 ODN'eiCTHN
KO 1\X^X.X THH9& H
Sect. III. 4.] Containing the New Testament. 141
Latin writing of this MS. which Mai deciphered with great difficulty, is
not specified ; hut, on comparing his specimen of it with other engraved
specimens, \ve are inclined to refer it to the eighth or ninth century,
Thejburih specimen (noted 1.61.) consists of a single sheet in small
quarto, containing four pages of part of Saint John's Gospel in Latin,
under which are found the very fragments of the twenty-fifth, twenty-
sixth, and twenty-seventh chapters of Matthew's Gospel, which are want-
ing in the celebrated manuscript of the Gothic Gospels preserved at Up-
sal, and usually known by the appellation of the Codesc Argenteus.
Thejifth and last manuscript, (noted G. 147.) which has preserved some
remains of Gothic literature, is a volume of the proceedings of the Council
of Chalcedon ; under the later writing have been discovered some frag-
ments of antient authors, whose names Signer Mai' has not specified ; and
also a fragment of a Gothic Homily, rich in biblical quotations, and
the style of which he thinks shows that it was translated from some one
of the fathers of the Greek church. The characters of this MS. bear a
close resemblance to those of the Codex Argenteus, at Upsal, which was
executed in the sixth century.
The manuscripts above described are written in broad and thick
characters, without any division of words or of chapters, but with
contractions of proper names, similar to those found in antient Greek
MSS. Some sections, however,, have been discovered, which are
indicated by numeral marks or larger spaces, and sometimes by large
letters. The Gothic writing is referred to the sixth century.
The portions of the Gothic version of the Old and New Testament,
printed by signers Mai' and Castillionei, are, I. Nehemiah, chap. v.
verses 1318. chap. vi. 14 19. and vii. 1 3. II. A Fragment of
Saint Matthew's Gospel, containing chap. xxv. 38 46. xxvi. 1 3.,
65 75. and xxvii. 1. : this fragment contains the whole of the pas-
sages which are wanting in the Upsal MS, of the four Gospels,
III. Part of St, Paul's Epistle to the Philippiaus, chap, ii, 22 30.
and iii. 1 16. IV. Saint Paul's Epistle to Titus, chap. i. 1 ; 16.
ii, 1. ; and V. verses 11 23. of his Epistle to Philemon. The Go-
thic text is exhibited on the left-hand page, and on the right-hand
page the editors have given a literal Latin translation of it, together
with the Greek original. These arc succeeded by fragments of a
Gothic Homily, and Calendar, with Latin translations, Gothic alpha-
bet, and a glossary of new Gothic words which they have discovered
in the passages which they have printed,
VI, A very valuable CODEX RESCRIPT/US was discovered liprfy
thirty years since by the (late) Rev. Dr. JBarrettj senior fellow of Tri-
nity College, Dublin, While he was examining, different books in
the library of that college, he accidentally met
Greek manuscript, on certain Ifeaves of which h
writing, one antieut and the other comparatively .recent, til
over the former. The original writing OB ,*th$se /tefljjres |
greatly defaced, either by the injuries of tiaje^-'or by art ; on close
examination he found, that tins antient writog consisted of the three
following fragments : the Prophet Isaiah ? the Evangelist Saint
Matthew, and certain orations of Gregory Nazianzen. The frag-
ment, containing Saint Matthew's, Gospel, Dr. Barrett carefully tran-
Account of the principal Manuscripts [Part J. Ch. III.
scribed ; and the whole has been accurately engraved in faosimile by
the order and at the expense of the University, thus presenting to
the reader a perfect resemblance of the original. 1 The accompany-
ing engraving is copied from Dr. B.'s first plate. It represents the
18th and 19th verses of the first chapter of Saint Matthew's Gospel.
We have subjoined the same verses in ordinary Greek types, with a
literal version in parallel columns.
V. 18. ToTAEIYXTHrENESI^OT V. 18. NoWTHEBmTIIOFJSCITTTII
TnSHN-MNH2TET0EI USWAS'EEINGESPOU
SH2TH2MHTP05ATTO. . . SEDIIIS MOTHER
MAPIA2Tnm2H<I>nPIN MARYTOJOSEPHBEFORE
2TNEA0EINATTOTSET THEYCAMETOGETHERSHEWAS
PHQHENrASTPIEXOYSA' FOUNDWITHCHILD ^ '
EKHN^AFIOT BYTHEHOLYSPT*
V. 19. I&SH^AEOANHPATTHS V. 19. JOSEPHTHENIIERHUSBAND
AIKAIO3nNKAIMH0EA. . , BEINGAJUSTMANANDNOTWILL, , ,
AYTHNAEirMATEHAI TOMAKEHERAPUBLICEXAMPLE
EBOTAH0HAA0PAAnOAY WASMINDEDPRIVILYTOPUT
5AIATTHN. HERAWAY.
Of thfe original writing of this manuscript^ which Dr, Barrett calls
the Co$$ Veins? only sixty-four leaves remain, in a very mutilated
state : 'each page contains one column ; and the columns in general
consist 4 of twenty-one lines, and sometimes (though rarely) of twenty-
two or twenty-three ; the lines are nearly of equal lengths, and con-
sist, ordinarily, of eighteen or twenty square letters, written on vellum
originally of a purple colour, but without any points. From these
two circumstances, as well as from the division of the text, the ortho-
graphy, mode of pointing, abbreviations, and from some other con-
siderations, Dr. Barrett, with great probability, fixes its age to the
sixlih century. This manuscript follows the Alexandrian Recension.
The Codex Recens* or la^jer waiting (which contains several tracts of
some Greek fathejsa^ Ke attributes to a scribe of the thirteenth cen-
tury : about whichjffielt Became^ general "'practice to erase antient
TTOJings, and insea^otffe* irTtliei^plac^. 2 ,
VIL OThe Codep* Lfflidianm 3.>a.$ it-is 'noted -by; Dr. Mill, but
noted by the letter E bpWetstein^nd *JE by Griesbach, is a Greek-
Latin manuscript of the Acts of the Apostles, in whicfcthe Latin text
is one of those versions whidh differ ftocn Jerome's ^edition, having
been altered from the particular Greek text of thte manuscript. It is
defective from chap.xxvi. 29. to xxviii. 26.
This manuscript is erroneously supposed td have been the Identical
book used by the venerable Bede in the seventh century, beca'use it
i The title of this interesting (and comparatively'Httle known) publication is as follows :
" Evangelium Secundum Matthseum ex Codice Rcscripto in Bibliothoca Collegu 8803.
Trinitatis justa Dublin : Descriptum Opera ct Studio Johanms Barrett, S, T. F.
MDCCCL" 4to.
* Dr, Barrett's Prolegomena, pp. 2 9.
s So called from Archbishop Laud, who gave this, among many other precious manu-
scripts, to the University of Oxford. It is now preserved in the Bodleian Library, F. 82.
No, 1119.
NO s
~ >
v
o
-r-Q)O
,\
K
CD
CD
I7l
.
2 7 I
CD
0-0)
Zb23
cur 1 LCD
/TN *~
Zo
^z-y
MW ^*^ MMp
O
CD
- h
a
-
t
h
' r> T
CD
= iz
(I
!S V ' ~<
v V ^
V sj
"* ' x IN
\\. !~-
-<\ ^
^' ^
X ^.
^ <:
f 1
i~
\
" 1
^
. V
*&*.
4
0) 3
X.
^sl
V;
^ 9
1
^
' $
&
o
to o
loo^S
cD-e-b
r
V
CO
(f>
CD
CD
I -,
,.s
- o
Sect. III. 4*.] Containing the New Testament. 143
has all those irregular readings which, in his Commentaries on the
Acts, he says were in his book ; and no other manuscript is now
found to have them. There is an extraordinary coincidence between
it and the old Syriac version of the Acts of the Apostles. Wetstein
conjectures, from an edict of a Sardinian prince, Flavius Pancratius,
written at the end of this manuscript, and from several other circum-
stances, that it was written in Sardinia in the seventh century. To
this conjecture Michaelis is disposed to accede, though Dr. Woide
supposed it to have been written in the East, because its orthography
has several properties observable in the Codex Alexandrinus. But
as these peculiarities are also found in other very antient manuscripts,
Bishop Marsh considers them as insufficient to warrant the inference,
especially when we reflect on the great improbability that a GreeJc
manuscript written in the East should be accompanied with a Latin
translation. It will be seen from the annexed fac-simile \ which re-
presents the chief part of Acts vii, 2,, that this Latin translation, con-
trary to the usual arrangement of the Greek-Latin manuscripts, occu-
pies the first column of the page. Only one word (or at^the utmost,
two or three words, and that but seldom,) is written in a line, and in
uncial or capital letters ; and they are so written that each Latin
word is always opposite to the correspondent Greek word. Hence
it is evident, that the manuscript was written for the use of a person
who was not well skilled in both languages ; and as the Latin occu-
pies the first column, this circumstance is an additional evidence that
it was written in the West of Europe, where Latin only was spoken.
For the satisfaction of the English reader, the verse in question is
subjoined in common Roman and Greek capitals, with the corre-
sponding literal English in a third column.
AD ILLE AIT OAE E$H AND HE SAID
UIRI ANAPE2 MEN
FRATRES AAEA'I'OI BRETHREN
ET PATRES KAI ITATEPES AND FATHERS
AUDITE AKOTSATE HEARKEN
DEUS O 02 THE GD
GLORIA TH2 AOSHS OF GLORY
UISUS EST a<I@H APPEARED
jATRI TOHPI UNTO THE FTHER
- NOSTRO HJVrON OF US
*' ABRAHAE. ABPAAM. ABRAHAM. *.,
'' " J
With regard to the date of this manuscript; M&, i A.stle'rfefers it
y the beginning of the fifth century; Griesbach to tie s&vejath, or
ighlSb.f and Mi\ Hearne to th eighth cfenturyvBut'-ftom d* shape
rtetterjs and other circumstances, B^dp'TlIarsh; providences it
*& be^ss^Brtienf than the Codex Be2ae 5 wJpchNtfiis written ^n the fifth
century. Probably the end of the sixth or the former part of the
seventh century may be assigned as the date of the Codex Laudi-
i It is copied from Mr. Astle's work on the Origin of Writing, Plate iv.
Account of the principal Manuscripts [Part I. Ch. III.
anus 3. This manuscript is of great value : Michaelis pronounces
it to be indispensable to every man who would examine the import-
ant questions whether the Codices Grseco-Latini have been corrupted
from the Latin, and adds, that it was this manuscript which convinced
him that this charge is without foundation. !
VIII. The CODEX COISLINT/VNUS, H. of Griesbach's notation is a
very beautiful MS. of the sixth century, containing fragments of St.
Paul's Epistles : it is written in uncial characters, with accents ; and
was formerly kept at mount Athos, where it was applied, as old parch-
ment, to the binding of other books, in the year 1218 ; as appears in
a note of the book to the binding of which it was applied/ 2
IX. The CODEX BOERNERIANUS derives its name from Dr. C. F.
Boerner, to whom it formerly belonged, and is now deposited in the
royal library at Dresden. It is noted by the letter G. 2. by Wet-
steiii and Griesbach. It contains St. Paul's Epistles, with the ex-
ception of that to the Hebrews, which was formerly rejected by the
church of Rome; 
